Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2026-10-19_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour
/źƷǤ ƚŅ {ğźƓƷ WƚŷƓ /ƚƒƒƚƓ /ƚǒƓĭźƌ aĻĻƷźƓŭ aƚƓķğǤͲ hĭƷƚĬĻƩ ЊВͲ ЋЉЋЏ Committee of the Whole Њ͵ /ğƌƌ Ʒƚ hƩķĻƩ Each of the following items, either in whole or in part, is able to be discussed in private pursuant to the provisions of subsection 68(1) of the Local Governance Act and Council / Committee will make a decision(s) in that respect in Open Session: Ɠķ ЎʹЌЉ Ʀ͵ƒ͵Ͳ Ћ CƌƚƚƩ .ƚğƩķƩƚƚƒͲ /źƷǤ Iğƌƌ 1.1 Approval of Minutes 68(1) 1.2 Approval of Minutes 68(1) 1.3 Land Matter 68(1)(d) 1.4 Labour Matter 68(1)(j) 1.5 Financial Matter 68(1)(c) 1.6 Legal Matter 68(1)(f) Ville de Saint John Séance du conseil municipal Lundi 19 octobre 2026 18 h e Salle du Conseil municipal, 2 étage, hôtel de ville Comité plénier 1. Ouverture de la séance e 17 h 30 Clôture du comité plénier salle de conseil au 2 étage 1.1 Approbation du procèsverbal 68(1) 1.2 Approbation du procèsverbal 68(1) 1.3 Question foncière 68(1)d) 1.4 Question de travail 68(1)j) Séance ordinaire 1. Ouverture de la séance 1.1 Reconnaissance territoriale 1.2 Hymne national 4.1 Procès-verbal du 5 octobre 2026 (recommandation : approbation du procès-verbal) 4.2 Stratégie Logement pour tous : Mise à jour Octobre 2026 (recommandation : à recevoir pour information) 4.3 figurant dans le rapport) 4.4 Fonds de résilience communautaire Approbation des subventions, deuxième tour de 2026 (recommandation figurant dans le rapport) 4.5 Fonds pour les transports en commun au Canada Entente relative au ommandation figurant dans le rapport) 4.6 Drury Cove Road (recommandation figurant dans le rapport) 4.7 Demande de Fonds communautaire du Conseil Conseiller D. Merrithew Centre communautaire de Latimore Lake (recommandation : approuver la demande) 4.8 Demande de Fonds communautaire du Conseil Conseiller G. Hooley Centre communautaire de Latimore Lake (recommandation : approuver la demande) 4.9 Demande de Fonds communautaire du Conseil Conseiller P. Dempsey Centre communautaire de Latimore Lake (recommandation : approuver la demande) 4.10 Demande de Fonds communautaire du Conseil Conseiller R. Moore P.U.L.S.E. Inc. (recommandation : approuver la demande) 4.11 Correspondance : E. Levesque Incidence de la décision relative à : renvoi à 4.12 Correspondance : Romero House Inc. Demande de modification de : renvoi à 5. Commentaires présentés par les membres 6. Proclamation 7. Délégations et présentations 7.1 Avenue B : La réduction des méfaits sauve des vies 8. Audiences publiques 8.1 Proposition de modification de présentation du personnel 460, chemin Milford / 40, Sealedge Court 9. Étude des arrêtés municipaux 10. Interventions des membres du conseil 10.1 Avis de motion Présentation publique par la patinoire Lord Beaverbrook (conseiller Norton) 10.2 Avis de motion la réglementation (Conseiller Moore) 11. Affaires municipales évoquées par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12. Rapports déposés par les comités 12.1 Comité : Normes prescrites applicables à tout de réparation automobile au 4-6, croissant McLaughlin 12.2 Comité de la sécurité publique : Mandat de la Commission de police de Saint John Governedge 12.3 Comité de la sécurité publique : Processus de nomination de la Commission de police de Saint John Governedge 14. Correspondance générale 15. Ordre du jour supplémentaire 16. Comité plénier 16.1 Accord de licence avec NB Power pour effectuer des travaux de débroussaillage dans le cadre du project du corridor de Saint John (SJCP) 17. Levée de la séance COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN OCTOBER 5, 2026, AT 6:00 PM ND 2 FLOOR COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL Present: Deputy Mayor John MacKenzie Councillor-at-Large Gary Sullivan Councillor-at-Large Gina Hooley Councillor Ward 1 Greg Norton Councillor Ward 1 Sherri Colwell-McCavour Councillor Ward 2 Brian Wyatt Councillor Ward 3 Eric Savoie Councillor Ward 3 Ryan Moore Councillor Ward 4 Paul Dempsey Councillor Ward 4 David Merrithew Absent: Mayor Donna Noade Reardon Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer I. Fogan Deputy Chief Administrative Office and Chief Financial Officer K. Fudge Chief Development and Community Officer A. Poffenroth Chief Corporate Officer (Interim) S. Hossack Chief Operating Officer (Interim) K. Loughery Director Legal Services J. Boucher Director External Relations and Customer Service L. Kennedy City Clerk J. Taylor Deputy City Clerk A. McLennan 1. Call to Order 1 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 1.1 Land Acknowledgement Councillor Dempsey read aloud the Land Acknowledgement and called for a moment of reflection. is situated is the traditional territory of the Wolastoqiyik/Maliseet.The Wolastoqiyik/Maliseet along with their Indigenous Neighbours, and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s that protected their rights to lands 1.2 National Anthem 2. Approval of Agenda Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Colwell-McCavour: RESOLVED that the agenda of October 5, 2026, with the deferral of item 4.4 Renaming of a Section of chemin Drury Cove Road and the addition of items 16.1 Recommended Appointments to Committees; 16.2 St. Peters Baseball Rehabilitation - RDC Agreement; 16.3 First Amending Agreement to Project Implementation Agreement - Multiplex; 16.4 Stop Up and Close of Inverness Ave. Undeveloped ROW; 16.5 Clarifying Provincial and Municipal Responsibilities Related to Homelessness; and 16.6 Housing for All: Outreach Services Agreement Amendment, be approved. MOTION CARRIED. 3. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest No disclosures were declared. 4. Consent Agenda 4.1 RESOLVED that the minutes of September 21, 2026, be approved. 4.2 RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2026-220: Public Notice and Scheduling of a Section 59 Amendment for 40 Sealedge Court, Council approve the scheduling and publication of notice for the Public Hearing related to the Section 59 Amendment from applicant Seale Ventures Inc. for 460 Milford Road/40 Sealedge Court (PID 55245153) scheduled for Monday, October 19, 2026, to be held in the Council Chamber, City Hall 2nd floor, 15 Market Square, Saint John, NB. 4.3 RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2026-215: Amending Agreement - Vulnerability Assessment of Urban Heat Island Effect and Climate Adaptation Risk Assessment in Saint John, the City enter into the Amending Letter 2026-215 to receive additional funding from the Green Municipal Fund under the Local Leadership for Climate Adaptation (LLCA) Program, for the Vulnerability Assessment of the Urban Heat to approve the change in scope of the Assessment, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Amendment and any other documents ancillary thereto. 2 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 4.4 Item deferred. 4.5 RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2026-214: Renaming Three Sections of promenade Highmeadow Drive, Common Council amend ber 2 on the map as of November 5th, 2026. 4.6 RESOLVED that as recommended in the submitted report M&C 2026-227: -2030 Federation of Canadian Municipalities Board of Directors Meeting, Common Council support Envision Saint J bid to host a 2029 or 2030 Federation of Canadian Municipalities Board of Directors meeting in Saint John and endorse a potential City contribution of up to $50,000, conditional upon a successful bid, with any funding commitment to be considered and 4.7 RESOLVED that the request for a proclamation from the Kiwanis Club of Saint John be referred to the Clerk to prepare the proclamation. 4.8 RESOLVED that the correspondence from A. Pottle re: Developer Consultation for Planning Applications Policy be received for information. 4.9 RESOLVED that the correspondence from Fundy Regional Service Commission to the City Clerk re: Submission of Draft 2027 Fundy Regional Service Commission Budget be received for information. 4.10 RESOLVED that the correspondence from Fundy Regional Service Commission to the Mayor re: Submission of Draft 2027 Fundy Regional Service Commission Budget be received for information. 4.11 RESOLVED that the correspondence from P. Adams re: Loyalist City Burial Ground Request to Present be referred to the CAO. 4.12 RESOLVED that the correspondence from the Saint John Transit Commission re: Transit Fares 2027 be referred to the CAO. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that the recommendation set out in each consent agenda item respectively, with the exception of item 4.4 which was deferred, be adopted. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. Members Comments Members commented on various local events. 3 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 6. Proclamation 6.1 The Deputy Mayor proclaimed October 10, 2026, as National Dental Care Day in The City of Saint John. 6.2 The Deputy Mayor proclaimed October 15, 2026, as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day and the month of October 2026 as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month in The City of Saint John. 7. Delegations / Presentations 7.1 2027 FRSC Draft Budget Overview Fundy Regional Service Commission Phil Ouellette and Laura Burnett of the Fundy Regional Service Commission reviewed the submitted presentation entitled 2027 FRSC Draft Budget Overview. 7.2 Canada Games Aquatic Centre Renewal Project Graeme Stewart-Robertson of the Fundy Regional Service Commission reviewed the submitted presentation entitled CGAC Renewal Project - Timeline, Scope, and Next . 7.3 2029 Canada Games Host Society Andrew Beckett of Envision Saint John reviewed the submitted presentation entitled Canada Games Aquatic Centre - . Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Moore: Renewal Project - Centre - 2029 Canada Games Host MOTION CARRIED. 8. Public Hearings 9. Consideration of By-Laws 9.1 Zoning By-law Amendment - 90 Douglas Avenue (3rd Reading) Moved by Councillor Moore, seconded by Councillor Wyatt: RESOLVED that the by-law entitled -law Number C.P. 111-225 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-law The City of Saint John, a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1,904 square metres, located at 90 Douglas Avenue, also identified as PID 55190680, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to General Commercial (CG), be read. MOTION CARRIED. 4 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 The by-law entitled -law Number C.P. 111-225 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of , was read in its entirety. Moved by Councillor Colwell-McCavour, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that the by--law Number C.P. 111-225 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- The City of Saint John, a parcel of land having an area of approximately 1,904 square metres, located at 90 Douglas Avenue, also identified as PID 55190680, from Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) to General Commercial (CG), be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. MOTION CARRIED. Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled -law Number C.P. 111-225 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John. 9.2 Public Presentation of Municipal Plan Amendment - 26 Meadow Lane / 297 City Road Chief Development and Community Officer A. Poffenroth displayed an image indicating the location of the subject property and gave a public presentation for a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would redesignate on Schedule B of the Municipal Development Plan land having an approximate area of 197 square metres identified as PID 00018952 from Commercial Corridor to Medium to High Density Residential to create an 8-unit apartment. Written objections to the proposed amendment may be made to the Council until Wednesday, November 4, 2026. 9.3 -law - st and 2nd Reading) Director Legal Services J. Boucher provided an overview. Moved by Councillor Colwell-McCavour, seconded by Councillor Dempsey: RESOLVED that the by-By-law Number LG-15 A Law to Amend a By-law respecting the Procedures of the Common Council of The be amended - Procedure for Statutory Public Hearing; and further that this amendment comes into force on the first day of January 2027, be read a first time. MOTION CARRIED, with Councillor Sullivan voting nay. Read a first time by title, the by--law Number LG-15 A Law to Amend a By- . Moved by Councillor Norton, seconded by Councillor Dempsey: RESOLVED that the by--law Number LG-15 A Law to Amend a By-law - Procedure for Statutory Public Hearing; and further that this amendment comes into force on the first day of January 2027, be read a second time. 5 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 MOTION CARRIED, with Councillor Sullivan voting nay. Read a second time by title, the by--law Number LG-15 A Law to Amend a By-law respecting . 10. Submissions by Council Members 11. Business Matters Municipal Officers 11.1 Comprehensive Parking Study - South Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Final Report John Kemp of Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Inc. reviewed the submitted presentation entitled . Moved by Councillor Merrithew, seconded by Councillor Savoie: RESOLVED that the submitted report M&C 2026-221: Comprehensive Parking Study - South Central Peninsula Neighbourhood Final Report prepared by Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Inc., be received for information. MOTION CARRIED. 12. Committee Reports 12.1 Finance Committee: Financial Policies Chief Financial Officer K. Fudge provided an overview. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Wyatt: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Finance Committee, Common Council approves the following policies: FAS-003 Operating and Capital Reserves Policy FAS-004 Operating Budget Policy FAS-011 Strategic Procurement Policy FAS-021 Budget Monitoring Policy FAS-025 Travel Policy MOTION CARRIED. 12.2 Finance Committee: Winter Management Plan Audit Implementation 2026-2027 Councillor Sullivan provided an overview as Chair of the Finance Committee. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Merrithew: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Finance Committee, Common Council: 1. Endorse continuation of the current street and sidewalk service deliverables detailed in the Winter Management Plan; 6 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 2. Management Plan Audit as detailed in the submitted report; 3. Consider additions to the 2027 General Fund Operating Budget as detailed in the submitted report; and, 4. Endorse repurposing three of four new sidewalk plows to be purchased in the approved 2026 General Fund Capital Program from advancing the expansion of the percentage of sidewalks plowed to improving service to currently plowed sidewalks, as detailed in the submitted report. MOTION CARRIED. 12.3 Finance Committee: Draft 2027 FRSC Budget - 45-Day Feedback Period Councillor Sullivan provided an overview as Chair of the Finance Committee. Moved by Councillor Sullivan, seconded by Councillor Moore: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Finance Committee, Council: Њ͵ Direct the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to submit formal feedback on the draft 2027 FRSC Budget to the Fundy Solid Waste Commission (FRSC) within the 45-day feedback period (by November 6th, 2026), including the City of and, Ћ͵ Direct the CAO to prepare public communications outlining the City of Saint principles the City believes should guide decisions regarding capital investment, maintenance and renewal of regional facilities. MOTION CARRIED. 13. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 14. General Correspondence 15. Supplemental Agenda 16. Committee of the Whole 16.1 Recommended Appointments to Committees Moved by Councillor Moore, seconded by Councillor Wyatt: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, Council approve the following appointments to Committees: Saint John Board of Police Commissioners: to appoint Councillor Dempsey from October 6, 2026, until the end of his current term on Council. 7 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 Planning Advisory Committee: to appoint Andree Stephen and Corey Childs each for a three-year term from October 6, 2026, to October 6, 2029. MOTION CARRIED. 16.2 St. Peters Baseball Rehabilitation - RDC Agreement Moved by Councillor Moore, seconded by Councillor Savoie: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, the City enter into an Agreement with the Regional Development Corporation (RDC) for funding for the following project: Project 20537 - The City of Saint John - St. Peters Baseball Field Revitalization, generally in the form and upon the terms and conditions as submitted; and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Agreement. MOTION CARRIED. 16.3 First Amending Agreement to Project Implementation Agreement - Multiplex Moved by Councillor Merrithew, seconded by Councillor Colwell-McCavour: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, the City enter into the First Amending Agreement with the Greater Saint John Field House Inc., generally in the form as presented to Committee of the Whole at its meeting held October 5, 2026, for the purpose of amending the Project Implementation Agreement dated May 5, 2026, and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the said First Amending Agreement and any other documents ancillary thereto. MOTION CARRIED. 16.4 Stop Up and Close of Inverness Ave. Undeveloped ROW Moved by Councillor Colwell-McCavour, seconded by Councillor Savoie: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, Common Council approve the following: 1. That a Public Hearing to consider the passing of an amendment to the Street Closing By-law to Close a portion of Inverness Avenue, having an area of 614 Plan of Survey Showing Portion of Inverness Avenue, City of Saint John, Saint John County, New Chamber; 2. That Council authorizes the publishing of a notice of its intention to consider the passing of such the By-law Amendment identified above; 3. If Council gives Third Reading to the By-law Amendment identified above, that the City sell the stopped up and closed portion of Inverness Avenue to PMG Living Inc. for $25,000 (if applicable) on the condition that the purchaser be responsible for: a. any plan of survey required to initiate the process for the stop-up and closure for a portion of Inverness Avenue; and 8 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL October 5, 2026 / le 5 octobre 2026 b. All costs related to the conveyance of the property from the City to the purchaser; and 4. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the documents necessary to affect the transaction. MOTION CARRIED. 16.5 Clarifying Provincial and Municipal Responsibilities Related to Homelessness Chief Development and Community Officer A. Poffenroth provided an introduction. Director Community Services and Parks D. Dobbelsteyn provided an overview. Moved by Councillor Wyatt, seconded by Councillor Moore: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, Common Council adopts a position paper regarding Provincial and Municipal Responsibilities Related to Homelessness. MOTION CARRIED. 16.6 Housing for All: Outreach Services Agreement Amendment Chief Development and Community Officer A. Poffenroth provided an introduction. Senior Manager Community Support Services C. Coes provided an overview. Moved by Councillor Savoie, seconded by Councillor Colwell-McCavour: RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on October 5, 2026, the City enter the First Amending Agreement with Fresh Start Services for Women Inc., generally in the form as attached to M&C 2026-218, for the purpose of extending the Service Agreement dated September 25, 2025, for an additional 90 days, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the First Amending Agreement and any documents ancillary thereto. MOTION CARRIED, with Councillors Merrithew, Wyatt, and Norton voting nay. 17. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Moore, seconded by Councillor Dempsey: RESOLVED that the meeting of Common Council held on October 5, 2026, be adjourned. MOTION CARRIED. The Deputy Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. 9 foujpot m w f pub UQs Upubm!Ejwfstjpot Ovncfs!pg!Ufnqpsbsz!Hsffo!\[poft Hsffo!\[poft Pqfsbujpobm!TvqqpsuGsbnfxpsl!Bdujwbujpo Gsbnfxpsl!Jnqmfnfoubujpo Zfmmpx!\[poftSfe!\[poft Tjuf!Vqebuft /haahb /h b/L\[ w9thw M&C No.2026-239 Report DateOctober 15, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaDevelopment and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT:Referral ofItem toNovember PAC andDecemberPublic Hearing AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Bill MackeyPankaj NalavdeAmy PoffenrothIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION RESOLVED that the Councilrefer the applicationlisted below to the Planning AdvisoryCommitteeand set the date for thepublic hearing to be held at the meeting of Council scheduled forDecember 14, 2026, commencing at 6 PM: tƩƚƦƚƭĻķwĻǩƚƓźƓŭ ApplicantCarlos Newton For260-262 Tower Street PIDPID 00364596 and/or successor PIDs Location: Council Chamber, City Hall 2ndfloor, 15 Market Square, Saint John, NB. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Pursuant tosection 111 ofthe Community Planning Act,theCommon Council by resolution(1)refers applicationsto thePlanning Advisory Committee (PAC);and(2)setsthetime and place forthe public hearingstoconsidersuch applicationsandreceivepublic input. Public noticesmust be posted on the Citywebsite not less than21 days beforethepublic hearingsare held. The proposeddate for thispublic hearing isDecember 14, 2026, requiring notice to be postedonor before November 23,2026. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION At its meeting of August 3, 2004, Common Council resolved that: 1. The Commissioner of Planning and Developmentreceive all applications for amendments to the Zoning By-law and related to Section 39 \[now referred to as Section 59\] resolutions/agreements and proceed to prepare the required advertisements; and, 2.When applications are received a report will be prepared recommending the appropriate resolution setting the time and place for public hearings and be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee as required by the Community Planning Act. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Common Council established five priorities for their 2021-2026 term. Public hearings align with the REPORT Per the Community Planning Act and Councilresolution, planning applications that include a request for rezoningarereferred by Council to thePACfor itswritten views. Council includes the in its considerationofproposed applications. Atreferral,the Councilalsosetsthedatesfor its public hearingson said applications, directingstaff to post notices ofthetime and place of the public hearings. Regarding service and financial outcomes, the postingof the public hearings will ensure that reviewsof proposed applicationssatisfy the noticerequirementsmandated by the Community Planning Act, which provide forthe public INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person As part of the application review process, the proposed amendments are circulated to other City service areas, external agencies,and governmental departments for feedback. Responsesfrom the external reviews are included inthestaff reportssubmitted to the Planning Advisory Committee(PAC). The staff reports and PACwritten viewsare providedto Council. ATTACHMENT COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No.2026-228 Report DateSeptember 29, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaDevelopment and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council nd SUBJECT:Community Resilience Fund Grants Approval 2round 2026 AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Ian Fogan R onald Moncada D avid Dobbelsteyn A my Poffenroth RECOMMENDATION That, onthe recommendation of the Community Resilience FundCommittee, the CAO recommends that Common Council award the successful applicants of theCommunity Resilience Fund grant program 2026second round, as listed in MC 2026-228,and direct the Chief Financial Officer to facilitate payment to the successful organizations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Community Resilience Fund Evaluation Committee met on September 22, 2026, to review eligible applications received during the secondintake periodof the Community Resilience Fund (CRF)2026. This round completes the first year of thetwo-year pilot program approved by Common Council in December 2025, aimed at supportingsmall businesses and non-profit organizations impacted by crime in Saint John. A total of twenty-two(22) applications were received, and fifteen(15) are recommended for funding, representing a combined allocation of $44,491.94. The recommended projects range from security and prevention strategies to damage response and business resilience. These projects include the installation of security cameras, surveillance systems, motion detection, enhancement of fencing, lighting and repairs of windows and other affected properties. This second intake of the CRF program demonstrates a stronger public understanding of the and reduce vulnerability to crime. Theawareness was alsosupported by enhanced community outreach by staff, as well as stronger promotional support from community partners. While the total funding allocated at this stage remains relatively modest, the increased participation provides a positive indication of growing awareness and accessibility of the program. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) Common Council Resolution May 4, 2026 That, on the recommendation of the Community Resilience Fund Committee, the CAO recommends that Common Council award the successful applicants of the Community Resilience Fund grant program 2026 second round, as listed in MC 2026-122, and direct the Chief Financial Officer to facilitate payment to the successful organizations. Common Council Resolution December 1, 2025 RESOLVED that as recommended by Committee of the Whole, having met on December 1, 2025, Common Council: 1.Approve the Community Resilience Fund Policy as attached to report M&C 2025279 and allocate up to $250,000 per year for two years (total $500,000) from operating reserves to implement the Community Resilience Fund pilot. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The Community Resilience Fund aligns withCommon Council priorities,GROW by strengthening the local business environment supporting with themitigation offinancial impacts of crime, and BELONG by enhancing safety, inclusivity, and confidence in public and commercial spaces. REPORTIncluding Any Service and Financial Outcomes The Community Resilience Fund (CRF) is the two-year pilot program designed to provide financial assistance to small businesses and non-profit organizations experiencing the impacts of crime around the City. This report reflects the results of the second intake of applications. A total of 22 applications were received, including 14 from small businesses and 8 from non-profit organizations. The Evaluation Committee met on September 22, 2026,and is recommending 15 applications for funding, representing approximately 68% of the total. The recommended projects demonstrate continued demand for practical, prevention-oriented measures that improve safety, strengthen security, and reduce vulnerability to crime. Recommended Funding Awarding The Community Resilience Fund Evaluation Committee recommends the following applications to be awardedfunding: Type of No.NameCategoryDescription of the projectFunding Organization Change the locking system on four exterior doors from key system to electronic card system. Addition of exterior cameras Grace Security as an aid to identifying 1Presbyterian Non-Profitand $ 7,500.00 persons entering the building Church Prevention and/or damaging the premises. The Corporation of The Damage Window replacement and 2Anglican Non-Profit$ 2,397.75 Responseinstallation of thermopile. Parish of St. Mark -Stone Church Upgrade motion detection systems and live camera monitoring feeds to better Fort Latour Security support emergency response 3Development Non-Profitand $ 1,587.14 coordination with local police Authority Prevention and fire services. Equipment to support the comprehensive 3-year security infrastructure plan. Security ICS Creative Small Equipment is being installed $ 4 and Agency Businesson June 15th. (Security 528.43 Prevention cameras, magnetic contact panel, motion detector, video doorbell, hard drive) Interior Security Camera's at Security all entry points as a Station Street Small 5 and preventative measure.$ 3,559.25 Health Inc.Business PreventionWindow film/covering to enhance privacy and deter theft. Security fence at staff entrance/exit. Installation of a comprehensive security camera system and a cloud- based access control system for the building entrances. Security G.L.C. Realty Small The access control system 6 and $ 7,500.00 Limited Business allows authorized personnel Prevention to remotely lock and unlock exterior doors, monitor building access. Ajax security system and a high security door. The system includes: * Ajax Starter Security System Saint John Security * Five wireless motion and 7Theatre Non-Profitand glass-break detectors$ 5,110.58 Company Prevention* Two door opening detectors * Two exterior street sirens with LED notification * Two combination heat and smoke fire detectors. Graffitiremoval and paint for AREA 506 containers to match existing Ventures Ltd. colours. AREA 506 Small Damage 8 Replacement of broken Plexi $ 3,564.13 Waterfront BusinessResponse glass and upgradesto Container security cameras and build in Village noise alarms. AREA 506 Ventures Ltd. Security Bollards Installation as per AREA 506 Small 9 and recommendation from SJ $ 3,564.13 Waterfront Business PreventionPolice Department Container Village Keirsteads Small Business Replace broken window and 10$ 1,163.80 Flower Shop BusinessResiliencerelocation of security camera. Security Cameras: Two additional security cameras to improve exterior Security surveillance and deterrence, Resonance Small $ 11 and and to support monitoring Advisors Inc.Business487.89 Preventionand investigation when incidents occur. Lock Upgrades: New heavy- duty lock hardware for exterior doors. Reinforcement of access points to reduce break-in risk. AQS Air Security Cameras and video doorbell - Small $ 12Quality and Master lockDisc Padlock - Business783.29 Services Inc PreventionSolar Street Lights Roman The installation of Cameras Security Catholic that provide visual security 13 Non-Profitand $ 1,838.69 Bishop of and surveillance of the Prevention Saint John building and property. Delish Security Laptop to connect to the Gourmet Small 14 and security cameras and monitor $920.39 Rolled Ice Business Preventionactivity at the unit/shop. Cream To increase security fencing from 6ft to 8 ft, with privacy Steepleview Security panel inserted. 15Developments Non-Profitand $ 3,986.48 Reparations were also made Inc. Prevention to the existing fence surrounding the property. TOTAL$ 44,491.94 Seven (7) applications are not recommended for funding because they did not meet the program's eligibility requirements. Common reasons included requests for activities that were not directly related to the objectives of the Fund, and submissions that presented an idea or potential activity rather than a defined project with eligible expenses. These outcomes also provide useful information for staff in clarifying the program's purpose and eligible activities through future outreach and communications. It is important to note that the CRF operates on a reimbursement basis. Approval of an application does not result in funding being provided in advance. Approved applicants are required to complete the approved project, provide documentation demonstrating that the eligible work or purchase has been completed, and submit receipts or other supporting documentation confirming that the eligible expenses have been incurred. The 15 applications recommended for funding represent an average approved amount of approximately $2,966 per applicant. All recommended applications fall within the program's maximum annual funding threshold of $7,500 per applicant and are subject to the applicable cost-sharing requirements established under the policy. Considering the current funding allocation of $44,491.94 and the funding allocated during the first round of the program, which totaled $40,514.19, the total funding for 2026 would be $85,006.13. This amount represents 34% of the program's total annual funding, representing an opportunity to increase promotion and educate businesses and non-profit organizations about the benefits of it. Overall, the results of the second intake show that the majority ofeligible projects continue to focus on practical security and prevention measures, demonstrating how the Fund can support organizations in making targeted investments that contribute to safer businesses, non-profit facilities, and surrounding environments. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person Development and Community Services David Dobbelsteyn Strategic Services Kevin Fudge Community Resilience Fund Evaluation Viral Parikh, Finance Committee Benn Purinton, Community Standards Greg Cutler, Community Development Community Planning Yeva Mattson (Beautification Grants) Development and Community Services Kelly Bayne(Arts and Culture Grants) Housing Andrew Reid(Affordable Housing Grants) Community Planning and Housing Rodrigo Campos(Heritage Grants) Development and Community Services Lori Lambert(Community Grants) Uptown Saint John Nancy Tissington ATTACHMENT(S) N/A. /haahb /h b/L\[ w9thw M&C No.MC 2026 -236 Report DateOctober 13, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaService Delivery and Operations Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT:Canada Public Transit Fund Agreement for Transit Bus Replacements AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Kevin LougheryIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City enter into the Contribution Agreement generally in the form as attached to M&C 2026-236 to receive funding under the Baseline Funding stream of the Canada Public Transit Fund, and that the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized to execute the said Agreement and any other documents ancillary thereto. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In March 2025, the HonourableSean Fraser, P.C., M.P., Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Funding stream of the Canada Public Transit Fund had been deemed eligible by Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada. The Baseline Funding stream provides approximately $500 million annually to support public transit systems across Canada through predictable, long-term capital funding. Saint John 36 annually, representing a total funding commitment of $6,317,360 over ten years. Following the eligibility determination, the required Capital Plan was submitted and subsequently approved. Through this funding stream, the City of Saint John and the Saint John Transit Commission will apply these funds toward the annual replacement of up to two diesel transit buses that have reached the end of their service life. The approved Capital Plan covers the first five years of the program, with capital requirements and investment priorities for the subsequent five-year period to be reassessed prior to the next funding cycle. The federal contribution will fund up to 40% of eligible project costs, with the remaining funding to be approved through the City of Saint John annual Capital Programprocess. The agreement Common Council is being requested to endorse through this report is necessary to secure this funding commitment. This investment will support the gradual renewal of Saint service reliability, reduce lifecycle maintenance costs, and position the Commission to continue advancing its long-term fleet modernization and decarbonization objectives. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) N/A STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This report aligns with Common . REPORTIncluding Any Service and Financial Outcomes Saint John Transit requires a sustained and predictable fleet replacement program to maintain safe, reliable, and efficient transit service. A significant portion of the conventional fleet is operating beyond industry-recommended replacement age, with many 40-foot transit buses remaining in service approximately five years beyond accepted replacement benchmarks. Continued investment in fleet renewal is essential to maintaining service reliability, reducing maintenance costs, and improving the customer experience. The need for fleet renewal is further compounded by challenges within the North American bus manufacturing industry. A significant contraction in the bus manufacturing market has contributed to higher vehicle procurement costs and longer delivery timelines, while transit systems across Canada continue to experience aging fleets and increasing maintenance requirements. Delaying fleet replacement increases the risk of service disruptions, escalates operating costs, and places additional pressure on maintenance resources as vehicles continue to age. The Baseline Funding stream of the Canada Public Transit Fund provides predictable, long-term funding to communities with existing public transit systems. The program is intended to support ongoing capitaland planning investments that improve the sustainability, reliability, and resiliency of transit services, including the replacement and modernization of rolling stock. Saint John Transit has been allocated $631,736 annually through the Baseline Funding stream, representing up to 40% of eligible project costs. This funding, combined with contributions approved through the City of Saint John annual Capital Programprocess,will support the replacement of up to two conventional transit buses annually during the initial five-year funding period. A Capital Plan for the first five years has been developed, with the program, capital requirements, and investment priorities to be reassessed in advance of the subsequent five-year funding period. While Saint John Transit remains committed to its long-term objective of transitioning to a zero- emission fleet by 2040, the immediate priority is the replacement of aging vehicles that have exceeded their recommended service life. Saint John has established itself as a leader in zero- emission transit planning; however, the significantly higher capital cost of electric buses, combined with the need to address an aging fleet in a timely manner, does not currently permit fleet replacement at the pace required using zero-emission vehicles alone. As a result, the buses being purchased through this program will be diesel-powered vehicles, ensuring the continued reliability of transit service, supporting future service growth, and allowing the Commission to address critical fleet replacement needs while continuing to pursue future fleet electrification opportunities as funding programs and technology evolve. This long-term funding commitment will support the gradual renewal of the fleet, reduce the average age of transit vehicles, improve service reliability, reduce maintenance-related service interruptions, and help manage lifecycle costs while positioning Saint John Transit to achieve its long-term fleet modernization and decarbonization objectives. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person General Counsel OfficeGyan Munn ATTACHMENT(S) Contribution Agreement with federal government trough the Canada Public Transit Fund Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY CANADA CITY OF SAINT JOHN CANADA PUBLIC TRANSIT FUND BASELINE FUNDING CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR CP-001060CAPITAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN This Agreement is made as of the date of last signature. BETWEEN:HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the 1 Minister of Infrastructure and Communities,hereinafterreferred to as the Minister of HousingandInfrastructureand Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada AND \[Instruction: If Recipient is a municipality, use:\] \[LEGAL NAME OF MUNICIPALITY, E.G. THE CITY/ CORPORATION/REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF X\],continued or incorporated pursuant to the\[ACT\] I 2 RECITALS WHEREAS in 2021, the Government of Canada announcedlong-term, predictable federal funding for public transit which will be available to supportinvestments in reliable, fast, affordable, and clean public transit beginning in 2026/27; WHEREAS the Government of Canada announced that the Canada Public Transit Fund would include the Baseline Funding stream; WHEREAS the Baseline Funding stream focuses on enhancing routine capital and non-capital investment, ensuring the continual growth, rehabilitation, and replacement of public transit and active transportation infrastructure as well as increasing capacity for planning; WHEREAS theMinister of HousingandInfrastructureand Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canadais responsible for the Canada Public Transit Fund and wishes to provide financial support for capital plans that will advance the targets and objectives under this Agreement; WHEREAS the Recipient has submitted to Canada a proposal for the funding of the CP-001060 Capital Plan for the City of Saint Johnwhich qualifies for support under the Program; WHEREAS Canada provided a letter on July 31, 2026to the Recipient indicating an approval-in- principle of funding of the Capital Planproposal enabling the Recipientto begin undertaking project activities eligible for funding and subject to finalizing a contribution agreement with Canada; WHEREAS transit entities are key economic enablers, Canada would like to emphasize the importance of maximizing economic benefits for Canadian industries. This includes considering prioritizing Canadian materials when undertaking infrastructure investments, including investment agreements. WHEREAS the Recipient is responsible for carrying out the Capital Plan through the Capital Plan Components and Canada wishes to provide financial support for the Capital Planand its objectives WHEREAS Canada intends to provide Baseline Funding on the basis of approved Capital Plan Components; NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with the mutual covenants and agreements herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1 2 Recitals typically set out the background or nature of the Agreement and do not contain the rights or obligations of the Parties. Recitals are used for informational purposes. 1 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY 1.INTERPRETATION 1.1DEFINITIONS In addition to the terms defined in the recitals and elsewhere in this Agreement, a capitalized term has the meaning given to it in this Section. Agreement amended from time to time. 3 Agreement End Date March 31st, 2036,unless terminated earlier in accordance with this Agreement. AnnualReport described in Schedule C.1(Annual Report). 4 Asset movableassetacquired, purchased, constructed, rehabilitated or improved, in whole or in part, with funds contributed by Canada under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including but not limited to any Non-owned Asset. Asset Disposal Period means, with respect to a Capital Plan Component, the period commencing from the Effective Date and ending 5 years after a Component Substantial Completion Date, except in the case of non rail-based rolling stock where the Asset Disposal Period ends 5 years after the Delivery Date of an individual asset. Baseline Funds used in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Business Day holiday in the provinceof New Brunswickor federally in Canada, or a day on which banks are not open for business in the provinceof New Brunswick. Capital Plan in Schedule B(The Capital Plan). Capital PlanApproval Date July 23, 2026which is the date indicated by Canada in writing to the Recipient of-in-principle of the Capital Plan. meansasub-project that forms part ofthe overall Capital Plan. means the total estimated cost to the Recipient to complete the Capital Plan Component as proposed by the Recipient and accepted by Canada. Capital PlanCost total estimated cost to the Recipient to complete the Capital Plan as described in Schedule B (Capital Plan). n 5-year ProgressReport escribed in Schedule C.2 (Capital Plan 5-year Progress Report). Committee means the Agreement Monitoring Committee established pursuant to Section 5 (Agreement Monitoring Committee). "Communications Activity" or "Communications Activities"means, but is not limited to, public or media events or ceremonies including key milestone events, (including but not limited to calls for tender such as RFQs and RFPs, groundbreakings, project completions, and reception of significant project equipment such as buses),news releases, reports, web and social media products or postings, blogs, news conferences, public notices, physical and digital signs, publications, success stories and vignettes, photos, videos, multi-media content, advertising campaigns, awareness campaigns, editorials, multi-media products and all related communication materials under this Agreement. means the date at which a Capital Plan Componentcan be used for its intended use. Contract latter agrees to supply a product or service to the Capital Planin return for financial consideration. Declaration of Substantial Completion,with respect to a Capital Plan Component, in the form substantially prescribed in ScheduleE(Declaration of Substantial Completion). 3The Agreement End Date should occur on or before the funding authority end date. The date should be advanced such that all other dates fit within the Agreement End Date and so that all obligations of the Parties may be reasonably met. 4- reflective of civil and common law concept. 2 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY means the date at which an Asset is received and can be used for its intended purpose. Effective Date Eligible Expenditures by the Recipient that are directly related to the Capital Planand which are considered eligible by Canada as set out in Schedule A (Eligible and Ineligible Expenditures). Fair Value between knowledgeable, willing parties who are under no compulsion to act. Fiscal Year following year. In-Kind Contributions means non-monetary contributions of goods, services or other support provided by the Recipient, or to the Recipient by a third party for the Capital Plan, for which Fair Value is assigned, but for which no payment occurs. means events, news releases and signage that relate to the Agreement and are collaboratively developed and approved by the Parties and are not operational in nature. -means an Asset to which the Recipient does not hold the title and ownership. Operational Communications public safety notices (e.g., road closures), information that would be discussed at a council meeting, or letters to residents notifying them of upcoming and/or ongoing work. Program Canada Public Transit Fund. Third Party implementation of the Capital Planby means of a Contract. Total Financial Assistance total funding from all sources towards Eligible Expenditures of the Capital Plan, including funding from the Recipient and federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments as well as funding from all other sources, including In-Kind Contributions. 1.2ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreementcomprises the entire agreement between the Parties in relation to the subject of the Agreement. No prior document, negotiation, provision, undertaking or agreement has legal effect, unless incorporated by reference into this Agreement. No representation orwarranty express, implied or otherwise, is made by Canada to the Recipient except as expressly set out in this Agreement. 1.3DURATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement will be effective as of the Effective Date and will terminate on the Agreement End Date subject to early termination in accordance with this Agreement. 1.4SCHEDULES Thefollowing schedules are attached to, and form part of this Agreement: Schedule A Eligible and Ineligible Expenditures Schedule B The Capital Plan Schedule C Reporting Requirements Schedule DCommunications Protocol Schedule EDeclaration of Substantial Completion 2.PURPOSE OFAGREEMENT The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the terms and conditions wherebyfunding is made available byCanada to the Recipient for itsCapital Plan. 3.OBLIGATION OF THE PARTIES 3.1CONTRIBUTION BY CANADA a)Canada agrees to make Baseline Funds available to the Recipient in a total amount 3 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY not to exceed $6,317,360as set out in the Capital Plan Budget in Schedule B.2. b)Notwithstanding paragraph 3.1(a) above, the funding for fiscal years 2031-32 to 2035- 36 set out in Schedule B.2 shall only be made available after the Recipient has submitted and Canada has accepted a 5-year capital plan for the aforementioned fiscal years. c)The Parties agree that the funding made available in Subsection 3.1(a) shall only be committed to and payable by Canada in relation to approved Capital Plan Components. d)Canada agrees to pay contributionsto the Recipient of not more than fortypercent (40%) of the total Eligible Expenditures forcapital infrastructure Capital Plan Components; and not more than eightypercent (80%) of the total Eligible Expenditures fornon-capital Capital Plan Components, but only up to a maximum of 5 three million one hundred fifty-eight thousand six hundred eightydollars ($3,158,680) for the 5 year Capital Plan. e)Canada may recover the excess from the Recipient or reduce its contribution by an amount equal to the excessof; i.Canada's total contribution towards capital infrastructure Capital Plan Components exceedingfortypercent (40%)of Eligible Expenditures for capital infrastructure Capital Plan Components;or ii.-capital Capital Plan Components exceedingeightypercent (80%)of Eligible Expenditures for non-capital Capital Plan Components; or iii.the Total Financial Assistance received or due in respect of the Eligible Expendituresexceedingone hundred percent (100%) thereof. f)Capital Planis limited to making a financial contribution to the Recipient for the Capital Planand that Canada will have no involvement in the implementation of the Capital Plan. Canada is neither a decision-maker nor an administrator to the Capital Plan. 3.2COMMITMENTS BY THE RECIPIENT a)The Recipient will complete the Capital Plan in a diligent and timely manner, as per the Capital Plan details outlined in Schedule B (The Capital Plan), within the costs and deadlines specified in this Agreement and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. b)Recipient will submit a new Capital Plan for approval by March 31, 2030,in order for Baseline Funds to be available for fiscal years 2031-32 to 2035-36.The total amount payable by Canada across the two Capital Plans shall not exceed the amount outlined in Subsection 3.1(a). c)The Recipient will submit Capital Plan Components to Canada for approval as per Subsection 3.5 . d)The Recipient will be responsible for all costs of the Capital Planincluding cost overruns, if any. e)The Recipient will inform Canada promptly of the Total Financial Assistance received or due for the Capital Plan, or of any change thereof. f)The Recipient will be responsible for any and all costs associated with the Capital Plan should the Capital Plan or Capital Plan Components be cancelled, and the Recipient will repay to Canada any payment received for disallowed costs, unexpended contributions and overpayments made under and according to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. g)The Recipient will ensure the implementation of, and report on, housing conditions, environmental assessment and Indigenous consultation requirements, climate resilience requirements, and greenhouse gasmitigation requirements when required 5 Instruction for Analyst: Insert 5 year amount if 3.1(b) applies 4 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY under the agreement. h)The Recipient will ensure that all necessary rights, interests, permits, licences, approvals, registrations, and any other authorizations required to complete the Capital Plan Componentare obtained. i)Based on the definitions of "disability" and "barrier" per the Accessible Canada Act, the Recipient will ensure that the Capital Plan Componentswill meet or exceed the requirement of the highest published accessibility standard in a jurisdiction, as defined in the Canadian Standards Association's Technical Standard Accessible Design for the Built Environment (CAN/CSA B652:23), in addition to applicable provincialbuilding codes and relevant municipal by-laws. j)The Recipient will ensure the ongoing operation, maintenance, and repair of any Asset in relation to the Capital PlanComponentas per appropriate standards, during the Asset Disposal Period. k)Canada may request that the Recipient declare to Canada any amounts owing to the federal Crown, under legislation or contribution agreements that constitute an overdue debt. The Recipient recognizes that any such amount owing is a debt due to the federal Crown and may be set-off by Canada in accordance with Subsection19.6 (Set-off by Canada). l)The Recipient will inform Canada immediately of any fact or event that could compromise wholly or in part the Capital Plan. 3.3APPROPRIATIONS AND FUNDING LEVELS obligation does not arise if, at the time when a payment under this Agreement becomes due, the Parliament of Canada has not passed an appropriation that is sufficient and constitutes lawful authority for making the payment. Canada may reduce or terminate any payment under this Agreement in response to the reduction of appropriations or departmental funding levels in respect of transfer payments, the program under which this Agreement was made or otherwise, as evidenced by any expenditures. Canada will promptly advise the Recipient of any reduction or termination of funding once it becomes aware of any such situation. Canada will not be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, exemplary or punitive damages, regardless of the form of action, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, arising from any such reduction or termination of funding. 3.4FISCAL YEAR BUDGETING a)The amount of Baseline Funds providedby Canada for each Fiscal Year of the Capital Plan is calculated as the aggregate of the estimated eligible expenditures for all approved Capital Plan Component Costfor the fiscal year less discretion,anamount not exceeding any unexpended Baseline Funds providedin the previous fiscal year. The amount of Baseline Funds providedeach fiscal year is capped at the annual amountfor Baseline Fundsset out in Schedule B.2 (Capital Plan Budget) . b)If the amountof Baseline Fundsprovidedby Canada in respect of any Fiscal Year of the Capital Plan is determined to be less than the amount allocated in Schedule B.2 (Capital Plan Budget), theRecipient may request that Canada re-allocate the difference between the two amounts to asubsequent Fiscal Year. Subject to Subsection3.3 (Appropriations and Funding Levels), Canadaagrees to make acknowledges that requests for re-allocation of funding mayrequire appropriation adjustments or federal Crown approvals. c)In the event that any requested re-allocation of Baseline Funds is not approved, the amount of made available pursuant to Subsection 3.1 (Contribution by Canada) maybe reduced by the amount of the requested re- allocation. If the contribution payable by Canada pursuant to Subsection 3.1 (Contribution by Canada) is so reduced, the Parties agree to review the effects of such reduction on the overall implementation of the Capital Planand to adjust the terms 5 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY and conditions of this Agreement as appropriate. 3.5CAPITAL PLAN COMPONENT PROPOSALS Submissions and Approval a)The Recipient will be responsible for submitting Capital Plan Components to Canada for approval. In order for Baseline Funds to be payable in a fiscal year in relation to a Capital Plan Component, the Recipient must submit a proposed Capital Plan Componentto Canada for considerationon a date determined by Canada. b)Each Capital Plan Component submission must be provided in a format acceptable to Canada and must include all information required by and to the satisfaction of Canada. Each submission must also be attested to by the Recipient as being accurate and true. c)The Recipient will provide, at Canada's request and to Canada's satisfaction, any additional information related to Capital Plan Components submitted for approval. d)Canada will inform the Recipient in writing once Capital Plan Components have been approved or rejected. e)The Parties agree that the approved Capital Plan Component and approval letter shall form part of and be governed by this Agreement. f)For every Capital Plan Component, Canada will set a maximum on Canada's contribution funding in dollars and as a percentage of total Eligible Expenditures. g)The Recipient will promptly inform Canada of any cancelled or withdrawn Capital Plan Components. Changes to a Capital Plan Component h)The Recipient agrees that changes to an approvedCapital Plan Component will require Canada's approval. When requesting a change to a Capital Plan Component, the Recipient will promptly submit updated Capital Plan Component information to Canada's satisfaction. i)The Recipient will provide, at Canada's request and to Canada's satisfaction, additional information related to changes to a Capital Plan Component. 3.6CHANGES DURING THE LIFE OF THE AGREEMENT a)Where a change to this Agreement is contemplated, the Recipient will submit to Canada a request for a change. b)Where the change is approved by Canada, the Parties will execute the corresponding amendment to the Agreement in accordance with Subsection 19.14 (Amendments). c) additional information related to changes to this Agreement. d)This Agreement will be reviewed by Canada and the Recipient by January 31, 2031, and may be amended to incorporate changes, if any, agreed to by Canada and the Recipient. 3.7INABILITY TO COMPLETE THE CAPITAL PLAN If, at any time during the term of this Agreement, one or all of the Parties determine that it will not be possible to complete the Capital Planfor any reason, the Party will immediately notify the other Party of that determination and Canada may suspend its funding obligation. The Recipient will, within thirty(30) Business Days of a request from Canada, provide a summary of the measures that it proposes to remedy the situation. If Canada is not satisfied that the measures proposed will be adequate to remedy the situation, then this will constitute an event of default under Section 16 (Default) and Canada may declare a default pursuant to Section 16 (Default). 6 4.RECIPIENT REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES The Recipient represents and warrants to Canada that: a)the Recipient has the capacity and authority to enter into and execute this Agreement 6This section is a standard clause for contracts. Reps and warranties are statements by which one party gives certain assurances to the other, and on which the other party may rely. A representation is commonly a declaration of a specific fact that can be verified to be true or not, e.g., "recipient represents that it is a corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the state of e representations and warranties are not accurate or are not fulfilled. 6 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY \[Instruction: as duly authorized by \[BY-LAW OR RESOLUTION 7 REFERENCE\],datedby resolution of its Board of Directors, dated b)the Recipient has the capacity and authority to carry out the Capital Plan; c)the Recipient has the requisite power to own the Assetsor it has or will have secured all necessary rights, interests, and permissions in respect of the Assets, during the Asset Disposal Period; d)this Agreement constitutes a legally binding obligation of the Recipient, enforceable against it in accordance with its terms and conditions; e)all information submitted to Canada in regards tothis Agreement is true, accurate, and was prepared in good faith to the best of its ability, skill, and judgment; f)any individual, corporation or organization that the Recipienthas hired, for payment, who undertakes to speak to or correspond with any employee or other person representing Canada on the behalf, concerning any matter relating to the contribution under this Agreement or any benefit hereunder and who is required to be registered pursuant to the federal Lobbying Act, is registered pursuant to that Act; g)the Recipienthas not made, and will not make,a payment or provide other compensation that is contingent upon,or is calculated upon,the contribution hereunder or the negotiation of the whole or any part of the terms and conditions of this Agreement to any individual, corporation or organization with which that individual is engaged in doing business with, who is registered pursuant tothe federal Lobbying Act; h)there are no actions, suits, investigations or other proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of the Recipient, threatened and there is no order, judgment or decree of any court or governmental agency which could materially and adversely affect the Recipie Recipient will inform Canada immediately if any such action or proceedings are threatened or brought during the term of this Agreement; and i)the Recipient is in good standing under the laws of the jurisdiction in which it is required to be registered. 5.AGREEMENT MONITORING COMMITTEE If deemed required by Canada, the Parties will establish a Committee, identify one federal co-chair and one Recipient co-chair, and establish Terms of Reference. The Committee will: a)Monitor compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; b)Act as a forum to resolve potential issues and address concerns. 6.CONTRACT PROCEDURES 6.1AWARDING OF CONTRACTS a)The Recipient will ensure that Contracts are awarded in a way that isfair,transparent, competitive, and consistent with value-for-money principles, or in a manner otherwise acceptable to Canada and if applicable, in accordance with the Canadian Free Trade Agreementand international trade agreements. b)Unless otherwise specified by Canada, the Recipient will notify Canada of any Contract awarded in a manner that is not in compliance with the foregoing. Canada will notify the Recipient as to whether the expenditures associated with the Contract can be considered Eligible Expenditures. c)If Canada becomes aware that a Contractis awardedin a manner that is not in compliance with the foregoing, upon notification to the Recipient, Canada may consider the expenditures associated with the Contract to be ineligible. d)In addition to any other remedy available to Canada under this Agreement, if Canada considers the expenditures associated with a Contract to be ineligible under Subsection 6.1(c), the Recipient shall repay to Canada any funds that have been paid 7You will need to ask the Recipient for this information. 7 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY 6.2CONTRACT PROVISIONS The Recipient will ensure that all Contracts are consistent with, and incorporate, the relevant provisions of this Agreement. More specifically but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Recipient agrees to include terms and conditions in all Contracts to ensure that: a)the Third Party will keep proper and accurate financial accounts and records, including but not limited to its contracts, invoices, statements, receipts, and vouchers, in respect of aCapital PlanComponentfor at least six (6) years after the Component Substantial Completion Date and that the Recipient has the contractual right to audit them; b)all applicable labour, environmental, and human rights legislation are respected; and, c)Canada and itsdesignated representatives, to the extent permitted by law, will at all times be permitted to inspect the terms and conditions of the Contract and any records and accounts respecting the Capital Planand will have free access to the Capital Plan sites and to any documentation relevant for the purpose of audit. 7.FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS The Recipient agrees: a)to meet the following housing commitmentsthat directly unlock housing supply where it is needed most: i.Complete a Housing Needs Assessment if not already completed as part of another federal program including Housing Accelerator Fund or Canada Community Building Fund b)that by May 15, 2027, or asagreed to by Canada,provideto Canada confirmation that the above housing commitments have been metand will continue to be met for the duration of this agreement. c)Accessibility: A Capital Plan Component must meet or exceed the requirements of the highest published accessibility standard in the jurisdiction in addition to applicable provincial building codes and relevant municipal by-laws. d)Each Capital Plan Component will be required to meet the following climate requirements related to greenhouse gasmitigation, according to timelines outlinedin guidance: i.For applicable Capital Plan Components, as identified by Canada, complete a greenhouse gasassessment. ii.For applicable Capital Plan Components, as identified by Canada, use low-carbon ready-mix concrete that meets carbon emissions reduction requirements, and report on emissions from ready-mix concrete. iii.Purchase zero emission vehicles, unless otherwise deemed acceptable to Canada. iv.Climate resilience: Capital Plan Components must be implemented through taking actions to reduce climate risks. The Recipient will report on which risk-reduction measures were implemented to reduce significant climate risks, according to timelines outlined in guidance. 8.ENVIRONMENTAL AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT \[Instruction: No changes should be made to the provided clause unless agreed to by EAIC\] 8.1REQUIREMENTS UNDER APPLICABLE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL OR IMPACT ASSESSMENT LEGISLATION a)The Recipient agrees that: i.Canadawill assess Capital Plan Componentinformation, when submitted, to determine whether there are requirements under applicable federal environmental or impact assessment legislation, and communicate any such requirements in writing to the Recipient; 8 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY ii.No construction or any other physical activity, including site preparation or vegetation removal, may be carried out in relation to the Capital Plan Component, unless and until the requirements under the applicable federal environmental or impact assessment legislation are met and continue to be met. If the Recipient fails to respect this provision, Canada reserves the right to withhold further payments to the Recipient; and iii.Baseline Funds can only be used in relation to a Capital Plan Component after Canada is satisfied that environmental assessment requirements for that Capital Plan Componenthave been met. b)Canada may consent in writing that construction or any other physical activity, including site preparation or vegetation removal, be carried out for the portion of the Capital Plan Componentnot subject to federal environmental or impact assessment, and that related expenditures will be eligible for the portion of the Capital Plan Componentnot subject to federal environmental or impact assessment. 8.2COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL OR IMPACT ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS expense, any conditions related to the Capital Plan Componentand will ensure access to project sites, facilities, and documentation in accordance with Subsection 12.6(Access). 8.3CHANGES TO CAPITAL PLAN COMPONENT OR OTHERWISE a)If, as a result of changes to the Capital Plan Componentor otherwise, Canada is of the opinion that the Capital Plan Componentis subject to federal environmental or impact assessment legislation, the Recipient agrees that construction or any other physical activity to be carried out in relation to the Capital Plan Component, including site preparation or vegetation removal, will not be undertaken or will be suspended unless and until the legislative requirements are met and continue to be met. b)In relation to changes to a Capital Plan Component, Canada may consent in writing that construction or any other physical activity, including site preparation or vegetation removal, be carried out for the portion of the Capital Plan Componentnot subject to federal environmental or impact assessment and that related expenditures will be eligible for the portion of the Capital Plan Componentnot subject to federal environmental or impact assessment. 9.INDIGENOUSCONSULTATION \[Instruction: No changes should be made to the provided clause unless agreed to by EAIC\] 9.1INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS a)The Recipient agrees that: i.Canadawill assess Capital Plan Componentinformation, when submitted, to determine whether thereis a duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous peoples whose rights and related interests may be impacted by a particular Capital Plan Componentunder the Capital Plan, and communicate any consultation requirements in writing to the Recipient; ii.For Capital Plan Components where there is a duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate, Indigenous peoples, 1.The Recipient will consult with Indigenous peoplesthat might be affected.Specifically, it will: 9 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY a.Explain the Capital Plan Componentto thepotentially impacted role. b.Provide a report to Canada which will include: i.A list of all Indigenous peoplesand/or organizations contacted; ii.A summary of all communications with the potentially impactedIndigenous peoples; iii.A summary of any issues or concerns that the potentially impactedIndigenous peoples have raised, how they were addressed, and any outstanding concerns; and iv.Any other information Canada may consider appropriate. c.Carry out accommodation measures, where appropriate, the costs of which may be considered Eligible Expenditures. 2.Where applicable, Canadamay communicate further consultation requirements. iii.No construction or any other physical activity, including site preparation or vegetation removal, may be carried out in relation to a Capital Plan Componentunless and until Canada is satisfied that its legal duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous people has been met and continuesto be met. If the Recipient fails to respect this provision, Canada reserves the right to withhold further payments to the Recipient. iv.Baseline Funds can only be used for a Capital Plan Componentonce Canadais satisfied thatits legal duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous peopleshasbeen met. 9.2CHANGES TOCAPITAL PLANCOMPONENT OR OTHERWISE a)If, as a result of changes to the Capital Plan Componentor otherwise, Canada determines that further Indigenous consultation is required, the Recipient will work with Canada to satisfy its legal duty to consult and where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous peoplesand agrees that Subsection9.1 will be applicable. b)In relation to changes to a Capital Plan Component, Canada may consent in writing that construction or any other physical activity, including site preparation or vegetation removal, be carried out for the portion of that Capital Plan Component not subject to the duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous peoplesand that related expenditures will be eligible for thatportion of that Capital Plan Component. 10.PAYMENTS 10.1PAYMENT CONDITIONS a)Canada will not pay interest for failing to make a payment under this Agreement. b)Canada will not make payments until the requirements under Section 11 (Reporting) and any audit requirements as required in Section 12 (Audit, Evaluation and possible. c)Canada may delay making a payment to the Recipient in any given Fiscal Year until a sufficient appropriation has been provided by Parliament of Canada. d)Expenditures associated with anAssetwill not be considered eligibleuntil the 10 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY the necessary rights or interests with respect to land required in respect of that Asset. e)Canada will not make a payment until the requirements under Section 7 (Federal Requirements),Section 8 (Environmental and Impact Assessment) and to the extent possible at the date the payment is to be made byCanada. 10.2PAYMENTS th a)Baseline Fundswill be providedon an annual basis, either by June 30or 30 Business Daysafter acceptanceof a duly completed Annual Report, whichever is later. Baseline Funds will be provided in alignment with Schedule B.2 (Capital Plan Budget) and confirmation of eligible costs incurred. b)Notwithstanding Subsection 10.2(a) above, Baseline Funds for 2026 will be paid 30 Business Days after signature of the Contribution Agreement, or on a date determined by Canada, whichever is laterwithout requiring a duly completed Annual Report. c)In addition to the annual payment, Canada may make payments at any time. d)Canada reserves the right to withhold a portion of the amount payable under Subsection 10.2(a) where Canada is not satisfied that the amount payable will be expended in the same fiscal year. 10.3FINAL ADJUSTMENT AND RECONCILIATION Before the Agreement End Date, the Parties will jointly carry out a final reconciliation of all eligible expenditures incurredand paymentsmadein respect of the Capital Planand make any adjustments required in the circumstances. 11.REPORTING Any Project and performance reporting requirements will be undertaken and completed in accordance with Schedule C (Reporting Requirements). 12.AUDIT, EVALUATION AND MONITORING FOR COMPLIANCE 12.1AUDITS INITIATED BY CANADA a) Canada may, at its discretion, conduct anaudit related to this Agreement in accordance with the Canadian Auditing Standards and Subsection 19.3 (Accounting Principles).The Recipient agrees tocooperatewith Canada in the conduct ofany audits. Audits will be conducted the Recipient for costs incurred by the Recipient to respond to the audits, such as staff time. b) Canada uses a risk-based approach to determine whether audit(s) under this agreement are necessary. If this agreement is selected to be audited, the Recipient will be informed in advance of the scope and nature of the audit. 12.2INTENTIONALLY OMITTED 12.3REPORTS OF REVIEWS OR AUDITS CARRIED OUT BY, OR ON BEHALF OF, THE RECIPIENT The Recipient agrees to provide Canada with any reports of reviews or audits that have been conducted on the use of contribution funding under this Agreement as soon as possible, but no later than sixty (60) Business Days following receipt. 12.4EVALUATION Canadawill conduct an evaluation of the Canada Public Transit Fund.The Recipient agrees to collaborate with Canada in the conduct of any evaluation of the Program during 8 A Recipient Audit is defined as an audit contracted by Canada. Its scope is tailored to the needs of the Department, the typeof Recipient and the areas where additional assurance is needed. 11 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY and after the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, the provision of Capital Plan-related information and data. All evaluation results will be made available to the public, subject to all applicable laws and policy requirements. 12.5RECORD KEEPING The Recipient will keep proper and accurate financial accounts and records, including but not limited to its Contracts,invoices, statements, receipts, and vouchers, in respect of a Capital Plan Component, for at least six (6) years after a Component Substantial Completion Date. 12.6ACCESS The Recipient will provide Canada and itsdesignated representatives with reasonable and timely access, at no cost, to the Capital Plan sites, facilities, and any documentation for the purposes of audit, evaluation, inspection and monitoring compliance with this Agreement. 12.7CORRECTIVE ACTION The Recipient will submit to Canada in writing a report on follow-up actions to address recommendations and results of any audit, inquiry or evaluation findings as soon as possible, but no later than sixty (60) Business Days following receipt, and will ensure that prompt and timely corrective action is taken. 13.COMMUNICATIONS 13.1COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL The Parties will comply with Schedule D(Communications Protocol). 13.2 The Recipient communication produced as part of the Capital Planor Agreement, in a manner acceptable to Canada, unless Canada communicates in writing to the Recipient that this acknowledgement is not required. 13.3PUBLIC INFORMATION The Recipient acknowledges that the following may be made publicly available by Canada: a)its name, the amount awarded by Canada, and the general nature of the Capital Plan; and b)any evaluation or audit report and other reviews related to this Agreement. 13.4PROGRAM PROMOTION In compliance with the Privacy Act and relevant privacy regulations, Canada may: a)film or photograph the Recipient, its officers, servants, employees, or agents during visits, activities, and events for the purpose of promoting the Program. b)use or publish any such film or photograph internally or externally, in whole or in part, in any form and by any medium for the purposes of promoting the Program. 13.5OFFICIAL LANGUAGES a)The Recipient will ensure that information on the Capital Planis developed and is available in both official languages when it is intended for the information of, or use by, the public. b)The Recipient will communicate in such a manner as to address the needs of both official language communities. c)The Recipient shall encourage members of both official languages communities to participate in the implementation of the Capital Plan. 14.INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY a)All intellectual property that arises in the course of the Capital Plan will vest in the Recipient,with the exception of media taken by Canada for the purposes of 12 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Subsection 13.4 Program Promotion. b)The Recipient will obtain the necessary authorizations, as needed, for the implementation of the Capital Plan, from third parties who may own the intellectual property rights or other rights in respect of the Capital Plan. Canada will assume no liability in respect of claims from any third partyin relation to such rights and to the Agreement. \[Instruction: If an optional licence in favour of Canada is required, consult with COE\] 15.DISPUTE RESOLUTION a)The Parties will keep each other informed of any issue that could be contentious by exchanging information and will, in good faith and reasonably, attempt to resolve potential disputes. b)If a contentious issue arises, it will be referred to the the program director and the assigned representative of the Recipient.The program director and the assigned representative of the Recipient will examine it and will, in good faith and reasonably, attempt to resolve it within thirty (30) Business Days from the receipt of notice. c)Where the program directorand the assigned representative of the Recipientcannot agree on a resolution, the issue will be referred to the Parties for resolution. The Parties will provide a decision within thirty(30) Business Days. d)Where the Parties cannot agree on a resolution, the Parties may explore any alternative dispute resolution mechanisms available to them to resolve the issue. e)Any payments related to the issue will be suspended, together with the obligations related to such issue, pending resolution. f)The Parties agree that nothing in this Sectionwill affect, alter or modify the rights of Canada to terminate this Agreement. 16.DEFAULT 16.1EVENTS OF DEFAULT The following events constitute events of default under this Agreement: a)the Recipient has not complied with one or more of the terms and conditions of this Agreement; b)the Recipient has not completed the Capital Planin accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; c)the Recipient has submitted false or misleading information to Canada or made a false or misleading representation in respect of the Capital Planor in this Agreement, except for an error in good faith, demonstration of which is incumbent on the d)the Recipient has neglected or failed to pay Canada any amount due in accordance with this Agreement; e)the Recipient becomes insolvent, commits an act of bankruptcy, takes the benefit of any statute relating to bankrupt and insolvent debtors or goes into receivership or bankruptcy; f)the Recipient is wound up or dissolved. 16.2DECLARATION OF DEFAULT a)Canada may declare a default if: i.events of default occurs; ii.Canada gave notice to the Recipient of the event which constitutes an event of default; and iii.the Recipient has failed, within thirty(30) Business Days of receipt of the notice from Canada, either to remedy the event of default or to notify Canada and demonstrate, to the satisfaction of Canada, that it has taken such steps as are necessary to remedy the event of default. 13 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY 16.3REMEDIES ON DEFAULT In the event that Canada declares a default under Subsection 16.2 (Declaration of Default),Canada may exercise one or more of the following remedies, without limiting any remedy available to it bylaw: a)Terminate any obligation of Canada to contribute or continue to contribute funding to the Capital Plan, including any obligation to pay any amount owing prior to the date of such termination; b)Require the Recipient to reimburse Canada all or part of the contribution paid by Canada to the Recipient;and, c)Terminate the Agreement. 17.LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION 17.1DEFINITION OF PERSON In Section17a Third Party, a corporation, or any other legal entity, and their officers, servants, employees or agents. 17.2LIMITATION OF LIABILITY In no event will Canada, its officers, servants, employees or agents be held liable for any damages in contract, tort (including negligence) or otherwise, for: a)any injury to any Person, including, but not limited to, death, economic loss or infringement of rights; b)any damage to,loss of, or destruction of property of any Person; or c)any obligation of any Person, including, but not limited to, any obligation arising from a loan, capital lease or other long term obligation; in relation to this Agreement or the Capital Plan. 17.3INDEMNIFICATION The Recipient will at all times indemnify and save harmless Canada, its officers, servants, employees or agents, from and against all actions, claims, demands, losses, costs, damages, suits or other proceedings, whether in contract, tort (including negligence) or otherwise, by whomsoever brought or prosecuted in any manner based upon or occasioned by: a)any injury to any Person, including, but not limited to, death, economic loss or any infringement of rights; b)any damage to or loss or destruction of property of any Person; or c)any obligation of any Person, including, but not limited to, any obligation arising from a loan, capital lease or other long term obligation; in relation to this Agreement or the Capital Plan, except to the extent to which such actions, claims, demands, losses, costs, damages, suits or other proceedings are caused by the negligence or breach of thisAgreement by an officer, servant, employee or agent of Canada in the performance of theirduties. 18.ASSETS 18.1DISPOSAL OF ASSETS a)Unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties, the Recipient will: i.where the Recipient owns the Asset, retain title to and ownership of the Asset or part of the Asset for the Asset Disposal Period; and ii.for a Non-owned Asset, retain all necessary rights, interests, and permissions in Non-Owned Assets for the Asset Disposal Period. b)The Recipient will ensure that any Asset will be preserved, maintained, and usedfor the purposes of the Capital Plan, and that no Asset, in whole or in part,will besold, leased, encumbered or otherwise disposedof, directly or indirectly,during the Asset Disposal Period, unless the Recipient notifies Canada in advance and in writing,and 14 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Canada consents to such disposal. c)Upon alternate use or disposal of any Asset, which includes selling, leasing and encumbering, or otherwise disposing of, directly or indirectly, during the Asset Disposal Period, all or part of the contribution paid under this Agreement by Canada to the Recipient. 18.2REVENUES FROM ASSETS Canada may require the Recipient to notify Canada in writing within ninety (90) Business Days of the end of a Fiscal Year if any Asset is used in such a way that, in the Fiscal Year, revenues are generated from it which exceed its operating expenses. Canada may require the Recipient to pay to Canada immediately a portion of the excess which would be calculated, at the same contribution rate as the program contribution percentagein the same proportion as the total cost of the Asset. This obligation will only apply during the Asset Disposal Period. 19.GENERAL 19.1PUBLIC BENEFIT The Parties acknowledge that their contributions to the Capital Planare meant to accrue to the public benefit. 19.2SURVIVAL of this Agreement, will survive any termination of this Agreement. 19.3ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES All accounting terms will have the meanings assigned to them, all calculations will be made and all financial data to be submitted will be prepared, in accordance with the accounting standards that govern the Recipientsfinancial reportingor the Public Sector Accounting Standards in effect in Canada. 19.4DEBTS DUE TO THE FEDERAL CROWN Any amount owed to Canada under this Agreement by the Recipient will constitute a debt due to the federal Crown, which the Recipient will reimburse to Canada forthwith on demand. 19.5INTEREST ON DEBTS DUE TO THE FEDERAL CROWN Any debts due to the federal Crown by the Recipient after the repayment due date will constitute an overdue repayment and will accrue interest in accordance with the federal Interest and Administrative Charges Regulations. 19.6SET-OFF BY CANADA Any debt due to the federal Crown by the Recipient may be set-off against any amounts payable by Canada to the Recipient under this Agreement. 19.7MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND SENATE No member of the House of Commons or the Senate of Canadawill be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement, or to any benefit arising from it that is not otherwise available to the general public. The Recipient will promptly inform Canada should it become aware of the existence of any such situation. 19.8CONFLICT OF INTEREST No current or former public servant or public office holder to whom any post-employment, ethics and conflict of interest legislation, guidelines, codes or policies of Canada applies will derive direct benefit from this Agreement unless the provision or receipt of such benefits is in compliance with such legislation, guidelines, policies or codes. The Recipient will promptly inform Canada should it become aware of the existence of any such situation. 19.9NO AGENCY, PARTNERSHIP, JOINT VENTURE, ETC. a)No provision of this Agreement and no action by the Parties will establish or be deemed to establish a partnership, joint venture, principal-agent relationship or employer-employee relationship in any way or for any purpose whatsoever between 15 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Canada and the Recipientor between Canada and a Third Party. b)The Recipient will not represent itself, including in any agreement with a Third Party, as a partner, employee or agent of Canada. 19.10NO AUTHORITY TO REPRESENT Nothing in this Agreement is to be construed as authorizing any person, including a Third Party, to contract for or to incur any obligation on behalf of Canada or to act as an agent for Canada. The Recipient will take the necessary action to ensure that any Contract between the Recipient and any Third Party contains a provision to that effect. 19.11ASSIGNMENT The Recipient will not transfer or assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of Canada. Any attempt by the Recipient to assign any of written consent is void. 19.12COUNTERPART SIGNATURE This Agreement may be executed and delivered in counterparts (including by mailor other effect as if all Parties had signed and delivered the same document, and all counterparts shall together constitute one and the same original document. 19.13SEVERABILITY If for any reason a provision of this Agreement that is not a fundamental term of this Agreement between the Parties is found to be or becomes invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and if both Parties agree, it will be deemed to be severable and will be deleted from this Agreement, but all the other terms and conditions of this Agreement will continue to be valid and enforceable. 19.14AMENDMENTS This Agreement, including its schedules, can only be amended in writing by the Parties. Capital PlanBudget) Canada) do not require a formal amendment agreement between the Parties and may be made administratively through an exchange of written correspondence between the Parties. 19.15WAIVER A Party may waive any of its rights under this Agreement only in writing. Any tolerance or indulgence demonstrated by the Party will not constitute a waiver. 19.16NOTICE a)Any notice, information or required documentation provided for under this Agreement mustbe delivered in person or sent by mail or email to the identified representatives of the Parties at the following coordinates, unless otherwise specified by Canada: Canada: Assistant Deputy Minister Infrastructure Programs Sector 1100 -180 Kent Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 0B6 baselinefunding-financementdebase@infc.gc.ca or to such other address or email or addressed to such other person as Canada may, from time to time, designate in writing to the Recipient; and Recipient: \[INSERT TITLE OF POSITION\] \[INSERT ADDRESS\] \[INSERTEMAIL\] 16 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY or such other address or email or addressed to such other person as the Recipient may, from time to time, designate in writing to Canada. b)Such notice will be deemed to have been received: i.in person, when delivered; ii.if sent by mailoremail, when receipt is acknowledged by the other Party; or iii.if sent by registered mail, when the receiving Party has signed the acknowledgment of reception. c)If a Party changes its representative or the coordinates for that representative, it will advise the other Party as soon as possible. 19.17COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Recipient will comply withall applicable laws and regulations and all requirements of regulatory bodies having jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Capital Plan. 19.18GOVERNING LAW This Agreement is governed by,and is to be interpreted in accordance with, the applicable federal laws and the laws in force in the provinceof New Brunswick. The Parties attorn to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the provinceof New Brunswickand all courts competent to hear appeals from the Courts of the provinceof New Brunswick. 19.19SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS This Agreement is binding upon the Parties and their respective successors and assigns. 9 Any disputes relating to the agreement will be interpreted according to the laws of the province or territory indicated in this section, and adjudicated by the courts in that same province or territory. Only the laws of one province or territory may be indicated in this section. 17 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SIGNATURES This Agreement has been executed on behalf of HISMAJESTY THE KING in right of Canada by the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure and Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada and on behalf of \[INSTRUCTION: INSERT NAME OF RECIPIENT\]by \[INSERT TITLE\] HIS MAJESTY THE KINGIN RIGHT OF \[INSERT NAME OF RECIPIENT\] CANADA Per: Mark MatzPer: \[INSERT NAME \] Director GeneralMayor Public Transit Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada Signed for and on behalf of the Minister of HousingandInfrastructure and Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada. Dateof Canada SignatureDateof Recipient Signature I have the authority to bind the Recipient. \[Instruction: If Recipient requires more than one signature to execute the agreement, use:\] Per: \[INSERT NAME\] City Clerk Date: 18 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULE A ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES SCHEDULE A.1: ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES Eligible expenditures are costs incurred by an eligible recipient that are considered by Canadato be direct and necessary for the successful implementation of the Capital Plan, excluding those explicitly defined as ineligible under Schedule A.2. Eligible expenditures include capital costs, design and planning costs, as well as costs related to meeting specific program requirements, includingfederal requirements. Expenditures will only be eligible as of Capital Plan approvalin principle, or as of April 1, 2026, where approval in principle is received after this date. Funding for Eligible Expenditures, including site preparation and construction costs, can only be made availableto the Recipient following the Effective Date of this Agreement. Approval conditions must bemet as applicable, and any conditions outlined under the Payments section must besatisfied, including, where applicable, confirmation that environmentalassessment, other applicable federal environmental legislation, and Indigenous consultation and accommodation obligations have been met and continue to be met. SCHEDULE A.2: INELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES a.Capital Plan costs incurred before approvalin principle, or prior to April 1, 2026, where approval in principle is received after this date; b.Costsincurred for cancelled Capital Plan Components; c.Costsrelated to purchasing land, buildings, and associated real estate and other fees; d.Leasing land, buildings, and other facilities; leasing equipment other than equipment directly related to the construction of the Capital Plan Component; real estate fees and related costs; e.Any overhead costs, including salaries and other employment benefits of any employees of the eligible recipient or ultimate recipient, its direct or indirect operating or administrative costs and more specifically its costs related to planning, engineering, architecture, supervision, management, and other activities normally carried out by its staff, with the following exceptions: i.There is a lack of private sector capacity to undertake the work; or ii.The work involves project specific expertise, or proprietary or specialized infrastructure iii.A collective agreement requires the recipient to use their own unionized employees for certain project work; f.Financing charges, and loan interest payments, including those related to easements (e.g. surveys); g.Legal fees; h.Principal and interest payments to the Canada Infrastructure Bank; i.Any goods and services costs which are received through donations or in kind; j.Provincial sales tax, goods and services tax, and harmonized sales tax for which the ultimate recipient is eligible for a rebate, and any other costs eligible for rebates; k.Costs associated with operating expenses and regularly scheduled maintenance work are ineligible; l.Costsrelated to furnishing and non-fixed assets which are not essential for the operation of the asset/project. 19 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULE B THE CAPITAL PLAN SCHEDULE B.1: CAPITAL PLANDETAILS Capital Plan Description: The Capital Plan includes the following areas of investment: Rolling stock. Capital Plan Component proposals form part of this agreement as outlined in Subsection 3.5(e), and shall contain the project specific details of Capital Plan Components that fall within the identified areas of investment of the Capital Plan. Capital Plan Objective: Baseline Funding will provide predictable, long-term funding to communities with existing transit systems to support routine capital and non-capital investments, including public transit and active transportation system expansions, improvements, and state of good repair. To be eligible for funding under Baseline, all Capital Plan Components concerning public transit and active transportation must align with atleast one of the four following Program objectives: Increase the use of public transit and active transportation relative to car travel Increase the housing supply and affordability as part of complete, transit-oriented communities Help mitigate climate change and improve climate resilience Improve public transit and active transportation options for all, especially Indigenous People and equity-deserving groups. Capital Plan Component Assetsand Activities Baseline Funding will support public infrastructure, which is defined as tangible capital assets primarily for public use and/or benefit. The Capital Plan Components that will make up the Capital Planmay includecapital transitand active transportationcomponents, as well asnon-capital components. TheCapital PlanComponents must support Program objectives and expected results and must meet applicable federal requirements. For a capital infrastructure Capital Plan Componentto be eligible for funding, it must include the acquisition, enhancement, modernization, rehabilitation, construction, expansion, restoration, renovation, refurbishment, or replacement of assets that fall under one of the following categories: o Public transit systems and related infrastructure; or, o Active transportation infrastructure or networks. Non-capital Capital Plan Componentswill support transit-related development, planning, or design, of public infrastructure projects. For a non-capital Capital Plan Component to be eligible for funding, it must support one of the following: o A potential future capital project that would be considered eligible under the program; or o Transit and active transportation projects related to planning, feasibility studies, stand-alone design work or other related capacity building, research or data projects. Projects that support the development of transit-oriented communities are also eligible; this would include projects like transit-related housing needs assessments. Expected Capital Plan and Capital Plan Component Benefits and Outcomes In order to illustrate how the Capital Planand the Capital Plan Components will contribute to CPTFobjectives, the Recipient will report oneach Capital Plan Componenton an annual basis, and providea Final Report upon substantial completion of a Capital Plan Component. Recipients will also provide progress reporting and a Final Report at the Capital Plan level. The Recipient may also be required to share key data on the performance of their overall transit systems. 20 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULE CREPORTING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULE C.1: ANNUAL REPORT a)The Recipientwill submit progress reports, attested to by a delegated senior official,to Canada on an annual basis for the fiscal period ending on March st 31, oras required by CanadaAnnual. b)The first AnnualReport must cover the period commencing from the Capital st Plan Approval Date to March 31, 2027. c)The Recipient will be provided with an Annual Report templateby Canada . Each report must include, at a minimum, the following information: Capital Plan i.Capital PlanTitle, Recipient name and Capital Planidentification number; ii.Reporting period dates; iii.Financials at the Capital Plan level; iv.Reporting on the progress of implementing housing conditions, if applicable; v.Summary of activities and progress achieved to date; vi.Reporting against transit system metrics. Capital Plan Component in progress i.Capital Plan Component names and details; ii.Capital Plan Component financials; iii.Construction start and end dates (forecast/actual); iv.Progress against expected results as identified in the Capital Plan Component submission; v.An update on issues/risks, if any, and mitigation measures; vi.Update on any non-competitive contracting; vii.Reporting on progress againstfederal requirementswhich could include, butisnot limited to, accessibility standards and climate requirements related to greenhouse gasmitigation, Buy Clean, zero emission vehicles, and climate resilience; viii.Update on Communication Activities to date and future communications plans; ix.Progress on Environmental Assessment and Indigenous Consultation activities; x.Confirmation of installed signage, if applicable. Capital Plan Component when complete i.Capital Plan Component names and details; ii.Construction start and end dates (actual); iii. baseline identified at the time of submission of the Capital Plan Component; iv. submission of the Capital Plan Component; v.Total expenditures and Eligible Expenditures as well as federal contribution for the Capital Plan Component; vi.An attestation, signed by a delegated senior official, that the Capital Plan Component has been completed and that federal funding was spent on Eligible Expenditures in accordance with this Agreement; vii.The Declaration of Substantial Completion signed by an authorized official of the Recipient as deemed acceptable by Canada, and it must list all relevant documents as determined by Canada; viii.Demonstrating that all environmental conditions and Indigenous consultation and accommodation requirements have been met; ix.Reporting on progress againstfederal requirementswhich could include, butisnot limited to, accessibility standards and climate requirements related to greenhouse gasmitigation, Buy Clean, zero emission vehicles, and climate resilience; 22 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY x.Confirmation of the Total Financial Assistance in accordance with Subsection3.2(e)(Commitments by the Recipient) and Schedule B.2. (Capital Plan Budget). SCHEDULE C.2: CAPITAL PLAN 5-YEAR PROGRESS REPORT The Recipientwill submit a Capital Plan 5-year Progress Report to Canadaevery five years, starting in April 2031. The Capital Plan 5-year ProgressReport will includeat a minimum: a)All information required under Schedule C.1(Annual Report), coveringthe period from the last progress report to the date of submitting the Capital Plan ProgressReport; and b)A cumulative summary of the results and the financials for the Capital Plan, which will include the following information: i.Alignment with the completed results as identified at the time of submission of the Capital Plan; ii.Total expenditures and Eligible Expenditures as well as federal contribution for the Capital Plan; iii.Demonstrating that all environmental conditions and Indigenous consultation and accommodation requirements have been met; iv.Reporting on the achievement of federal requirements; v.Confirmation of the Total Financial Assistance in accordance with Subsection3.2(e)(Commitments by the Recipient) and Schedule B.2. (Capital PlanBudget). 23 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULED COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL SCHEDULE D.1: PURPOSE This Communications Protocol outlines the roles and responsibilities of each of the Parties to this Agreement with respect to Communications Activities related to the Capital Plan Components funded ,including joint funding announcements and allsubsequentmilestone communication opportunities. This Communications Protocol will guide the planning,developmentand implementation of all Communications Activities to ensure clear,consistentand coordinated communications to the Canadian public. The provisions of this Communications Protocol apply to all Communications Activities related to this Agreement and any Capital Plan Components funded under this Agreement. SCHEDULE D.2: GUIDING PRINCIPLES The Parties recognize the importance of managing the delivery of coherent Communications Activities based on the principle of transparent and open discussion and collaboration. Communications Activities undertaken through this Protocol should ensure that Canadians are informed of infrastructure investments made to help improve their quality of life and that they receive consistent information about the funded Capital Plan Components and their benefits. The Communication Activities undertaken jointly by Canada and the Recipient should recognize the funding of all contributors to the Capital Plan Component. The Recipient will address any deficiencies and/or corrective actionsidentifiedby Canadaor by the Committee. SCHEDULE D.3: GOVERNANCE The Parties willdesignatecommunications contacts that willbe responsible for Committee. SCHEDULE D.4: JOINT COMMUNICATIONS a)Canada and the Recipient willhaveJoint Communications about the funding and progress of activities funded under this Agreement.The Recipientwill inform Canada of all Communications Activities and invite Canada to Communications Activities events. b)Joint Communications related to activities funded under this Agreement should not occur without the prior knowledge and agreement of each of the Parties. c)All Joint Communications material will be approved by Canada and theRecipient, andwill recognize the funding of each of the Parties.If approval from one of the Parties or the Recipient has not been obtained, only the recognition of funding and quote(s) from theappropriate Partieswill be included. d)Each of the Parties may request Joint Communications to communicate to Canadians about the progress or completion of Capital Plan Components. The If the CommunicationsActivity is an event, it will take place at a mutually agreed date and location. Events include, but are not limited to, in-person or virtual news conferences, public announcements, official events or ceremonies, and news releases. e)The requestor of the Joint Communications will provide an equalvisibilityforall Parties toparticipateand choose their own designated representative forboth in- personeventsand/orannouncementsthatare executed by issuing anews release,orjoint statementonly. f)Canada has an obligation to communicate in English and French.JointCommunications products issued by the Government of Canada must cases, Canada will provide the translationservices and final approvalon Joint Communicationsproducts. g)The Recipient willbe responsible forproviding on-site communications andlogisticssupport.This may include audio-visual equipment rentals, Canadian 24 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY and provincial/territorial flags, apodiumand podium sign (template provided by Canada), and other items as needed and determined through advance planning activities between the Parties or the Recipient. Any related costs are eligible for cost- sharingin accordance withthe formula outlined in the funding agreement. h)The conduct of all Joint Communications will follow the Table of Precedence for Canada(https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/protocol-guidelines- special-event/table-precedence-canada.html). SCHEDULE D.5: INDIVIDUAL COMMUNICATIONS NotwithstandingSchedule D.4of this Communications Protocol (Joint Communications),Canadaretainsthe right to meet its obligations to communicate information to Canadians about the Agreement and the use of funding through its own communications productsand activities. Canada andthe Recipientmay include general program messaging and an overview of Capital Plan Components in their own communications products and activities. The Party undertaking these activities will recognize the funding of all Parties. Canada andthe Recipientmay each include general Program messaging and examples of Capital Plan Components funded though the Agreement in their own Communications Activities. The authoring Party will not unreasonably restrict the use of such activities or messaging by the other Parties and, if web-or social media-based, from linking to it. Digital Communications, Websites and Webpages Canada or the Recipient may issue digital communications to communicate progress of the activities funded under this Agreement. The Recipient will ensure that: a)Where a website or webpage is created to promote or communicate progress on activities funded under this Agreement, it must recognize federal funding through the use of a digital sign or through the use of the Canada wordmark and the following wordmark or digital sign must link to Housing, Infrastructure and Communities https://housing-infrastructure.canada.ca. The guidelines for how this recognitionisto appear and language requirements are published on the https://housing- infrastructure.canada.ca/pub/signage-panneaux/intro-eng.html). b)Where theRecipientproduces social media content to provide visibility to the Program or Capital Plan Components, they shall @mention the relevant Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada official social media account. c)The Recipientshallsend to Canada a minimum of two high-resolution,good qualityphotographs; one of theconstructionin progress (if applicable), and one of a completed other digital communications activities. Sending the photos willconstitutepermission to use and transfer of copyright.Photographs are to be sent tophoto@infc.gc.caalong with the Capital Plan Component name and location. Advertising campaigns Recognizing that advertising can be an effective means of communicating with the public, Canada and the Recipient may, at their own cost, organize an advertising or public information campaign related to the Program or activities funded under this agreement. However, such a campaign must respect the provisions of this Agreement, recognize the federal funding contribution,and the Government of Canada requirements for advertising(https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board- secretariat/services/government-communications/federal-identity-program/technical- specifications/advertising.html). In the event ofsuch a campaign, each Party agrees to inform the other Party of its intention, no less thantwenty one(21) Business Days prior to the campaign launch. Success stories Canada and/or the Recipient may issue communication activities and products, including but not limited to, project success storiesincluding the positive impacts on housing and communities, vignettes, and multi-media products, to promote the activities funded under this Agreement. The Recipient agrees to support Canada with content and visuals asrequiredand where possible. 25 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULE D.6: OPERATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS The Recipientis solely responsible for operational communications with respect to the activities funded under this agreement,including but not limited to construction and public safety notices (e.g., road closures), information that would be discussed ata council meeting, or letters to residents notifying them of upcoming and/or ongoing work.Operational communications as described above are not subject tothePolicy on Official Languages. Such products should include, where as applicable. SCHEDULE D.7: MEDIA RELATIONS, EVENTS AND PROJECT ANNOUNCEMENTS Canada andthe Recipientwill share information promptly with the other Party should sensitive and/or a significant volume of media inquiries be received orif majorstakeholder issues relating to the activities funded under this Agreement arise. Recipients willbe responsible foranswering media questions related to the progress, construction timelines, contracting, etc., of the activities funded under this Agreement. The Parties agree to have media events about the funding and status of the activities funded under this Agreement. Key milestones may be marked by public events, news releases, site visits, and/or other mechanisms. Either of the Parties or other funding contributors may request a media event. The requestor of a media event will provide at least fifteen (15) Business Days of notice to the other Party of their intention to undertake such an event. Both Parties will agree on the event location and date. Media events related to the activities funded under this Agreement will not occur without the prior knowledge and agreement of both Parties. SCHEDULE D.8: SIGNAGE a)theRecipient will install a sign to recognize the funding contributions of each Party at the site(s) of the funded activities. b)Where a physical sign is requested to be installed, it will be the Recipient who will produce and install a physical sign that recognizes funding of each Partyat the site(s) of the funded activities in a high visibility area, in accordance with current federal signage guidelines which are published on c)The recognition of funding contributions of each Party and the Recipient will be of equal prominence and visibility. d)Upon approval from Canada, digital signage may also be used in addition or in place of a physical sign in cases where a physical sign would not beappropriate (e.g., due to type, scope, location, or duration of the funded activities). e)The Recipientagrees to inform Canada of sign installations, as well as provide photos of the sign once installed, through a system developed by Canada or another processdesignatedby Canadain accordance withsection 15 (Information Management). f) construction is completed and the infrastructure is fully operational or opened for g)Recipientwill provide h)Where a physical sign is being installed, signage should be installed at each Capital Plan Component site 1 month prior to the start of construction, be visible for the duration of that Capital Plan Component, and remain in place until 1 month after construction is completed and the infrastructure is fully operational or opened for public use. i)Signage should be installed in a prominent and visible location that takes into consideration pedestrian and traffic safety and visibility. j)theRecipient will install a permanent plaque at a Capital Plan Component site once all construction work is completed and the site is open to the public, to acknowledge federal funding support. 26 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY k)Where a permanent plaque is to be installed, it will be the Recipient who will produce and install the permanent plaque. Plaques should be installed in a prominent and visible location that takes into consideration pedestrian and traffic safety and visibility. l)The plaque design and specifications must be approved by Canada prior toproduction,andmust be producedin accordance withcurrent federal signage guidelines which are published on. m)The Recipientwill provide photos of the plaque once installed, through a system developed by Canada or another processdesignatedby Canadain accordance withsection 15 (Information Management). SCHEDULE D.9: COMMUNICATIONS COSTS Costs related to Communication Activities that provide public information on the activities funded through this Agreement may be considered Eligible Expendituresin accordance withSchedule (Eligible and Ineligible Expenditures),andmust be agreed to in advance by Canada. 27 Delete all instructions upon completion Baseline Funding (CPTF) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCHEDULE EDECLARATION OF SUBSTANTIAL 10 COMPLETION In the matter of the Contribution Agreement for CP-001060Capital Plan for the City of Saint Johnunder the Baseline Funding Stream of the Canada Public Transit Fund Agreemententered into between His Majesty The Kingin right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of HousingandInfrastructureand Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada, and the City of Saint John represented by \[insert name of signatory\], concerning the \[CAPITAL PLAN COMPONENT NAME\]. I, \[insert name of signatory\],of the City/Town of \[insert location\], Province/Territory of \[insert name of Province or Territory\], declare as follows: 1.I hold the position of \[insert position title\]with the Recipient and as such have knowledge of the matters set forth in this declaration and believe this declaration to be true. 2. a)I have received the following documents for the \[CAPITAL PLAN COMPONENT NAME\]project: i.\[LIST NAME OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS, e.g. Certificate of Completion, Certificate of Performance, Occupancy Permit, etc.\]signed by \[insert name of person who signed relevant document\], a \[enter profession, e.g. professional engineer, professional architect or other applicable professional\] for the project. ii. b)Based on the above documents and the representations made to me by the professionals identified in Subsection 2(a) above, I declare to the best of my knowledge and belief that the \[CAPITAL PLAN COMPONENT NAME\]projecthas been substantially completed, in that it can be used for its intended use,as defined in the Agreement, on the \[insert day\]day of the \[insert month\]20\[insert year\]. c)I have received the following documents and based on these documents and representations made to me by the professionals identified below, I declare to the best of my knowledge and belief that the Project conforms with, as applicable, the \[List the applicable environmental review or assessment e.g. the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, Impact Assessment Act, or Northern Regime.\]: i.\[List name of relevant document\]signed by \[insert name of person who signed relevant document\], an \[enter profession, e.g. professional engineer, professional architect or other applicable professional\]. ii. 3.All terms and conditions of the Agreement that are required to be met as of the date of this declaration have been met. Declared at \[insert location\](City/Town), in \[insert name of Province or Territory\] (Province/Territory)this \[insert day\]of\[insert month\], 20\[insert year\]. _____________________________ Signature 10 Include known documents required under the program in in the space provided. Use a separate line for each document using the same text/approach as in subparagraph i of each section. Additional documents may be added to this schedule over the course of the agreement on concurrence of the Parties. 28 COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No.2026-234 Report DateOctober 12, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaFinance and Strategic Investments Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT:Renaminga Section of chemin Drury Cove Road AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Yves LégerMichael BakerKevin FudgeIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council located EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The northern and southern sections of chemin Drury Cove Road were originally intended to be connected as the Drury Cove development progressed. With residential development now proposed along the northern section and no definite timeline for connecting the two sections, maintaining the same street name for two disconnected sections could create confusion for emergency service providers. Toaddress this concern, staff discussed with the developer alternative namesfor the northern section. After discussion ofthealternative names consensus was reached in renaming it so that it becomes part ofpromenade Shoreline Drive.Thishas been reviewed and confirmed to meet NB9-1-1 streetnaming guidelines. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION None. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Ensuring street names and civic addressing meet NB 9-1- REPORT When the Drury Cove development was initially proposed, it was anticipated that the northern and southern sections of Drury Cove Road would eventually be connected as the development progressed. Maintaining two separate, disconnected sections of the same street is not recommended by NB9-1-1, as it can create confusion for emergency service providers and increase the potential for delays in locating an address. To date, there have been no civic addresses assigned to properties along the northern section of Drury Cove Road, and therefore the separation of the two sections has not presented an operational concern. The developer has recently submitted a subdivision plan proposing the creation of residential lots along the northern section of Drury Cove Road. The developer has also advised that there is currently no definite timeline for connecting the two sections of the street. Given the proposed development and the uncertainty regarding when, or if, the two sections will ultimately be connected, it is proposed that the northern section of Drury Cove Road, as shown on the accompanying map, be renamed Shoreline Drive.This would eliminate the potential for two disconnected sections of the same street name and establish a consistent street name for the new residential developmentthat would be a continuation of the existing The proposed street name change has been reviewed and confirmed to meet NB 9-1-1 street naming guidelines. The cost to the City will be approximately $300 to install new street signs. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person Quality of Life (Community Planning)Yeva Mattson Service Delivery (Pedestrian and Traffic Services)Chris Phinney ATTACHMENT(S) promenade Shoreline Drive CƩƚƒʹ/źƷǤ ƚŅ {ğźƓƷ WƚŷƓͲ bĻǞ .ƩǒƓƭǞźĭƉ ѡǞĻĬŅƚƩƒΏƓƚƩĻƦƌǤθƭğźƓƷƆƚŷƓ͵ĭğѢ {ĻƓƷʹ ŷǒƩƭķğǤͲ hĭƷƚĬĻƩ ЊͲ ЋЉЋЏ ЊʹЋЍ ta ƚʹ /ƚƒƒƚƓ /ƌĻƩƉ ѡĭƚƒƒƚƓĭƌĻƩƉθƭğźƓƷƆƚŷƓ͵ĭğѢ {ǒĬƆĻĭƷʹ ĻĬŅƚƩƒ ƭǒĬƒźƭƭźƚƓ ŅƩƚƒʹ {ǒĬƒźƭƭźƚƓ Ʒƚ /ƚǒƓĭźƌ CƚƩƒ \[ External Email Alert\] **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 Thu, 10/01/2026 - 13:23 Submitted by: Anonymous Submitted values are: About Person/Group Submitting First name Eric Last name Levesque Name of organization/group (where applicable) Centre scolaire Samuel-de-Champlain Mailing Address 67 Ch. Ragged Point Saint John. E2K 5C3 Telephone 5066584613 Email eric.levesque3@nbed.nb.ca If you do not wish to have your personal information (address, phone number, email) become part of the public record, please check this box. Yes About your Submission Topic of submission Impact of City Ice Allocation Decision Purpose for submission (what is the ask of council): We are requesting that Common Council review the current ice allocationprocess and the circumstances surrounding the cancellation of ice time previously allocated to our tournament. While we are no longer seeking to have the cancelled ice time reinstated, we believe the process raises concerns regarding fairness, transparency, consistency and communication. We are asking Council to review the process and consider whether changes are needed to ensure that future tournament organizers are provided with a clear, predictable and equitable allocation process. Executive summary See attached letter Document Uploads Letter to the city.pdf(652.74 KB) ROMERO HOUSE SOUP KITCHEN 647-649 BRUNSWICK DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NB E2L 3S9 (506) 642-7447 Subject: Request for Traffic By-Law Amendment: Parking Time Limit Extension on Brunswick Drive for Romero House Volunteers To: Saint John Parking Commission / Traffic Engineering Division Date: October 13, 2026 To Whom It May Concern, I am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of Romero House (Soup Kitchen) to formally request a parking designation review and later Traffic By-Law amendment for the block of Brunswick Drive directly servicing Romero House (647-649 Brunswick Drive) from PrinceEdward Street to Exmouth Street. Currently, the on-street parking on this block is restricted to a 2-hour maximum. We are asking that the city amend this restriction to a 4-hour maximum. Justification for the Change: 1. Volunteer Support: Romero House relies heavily on dedicated community vulnerable members. (Averaging 400+ meals a day, 13,000 a month, 150,000 a year). A standard volunteer shift is for 4 hours, 9:00-1:00. The options currently available to our 50+ regular weekday volunteers is to either disrupt meal service halfway through to move their vehicle to another street to avoid a parking violation or prohibitively require the purchase of parking passes. There is no choice currently available groups, businesses, university/college students, clubs that volunteer throughout the year to give back and better the Saint John community. 2. No Resident Impact: This block consists entirely of Romero House infrastructure and properties that feature their own off-street parking. There are no residential properties relying on these on-street spots from vehicle use during the weekday. 3. No Commercial Conflict: There are no retail or traditional commercial businesses on this street that require high vehicle turnover. Extending the time limit to 4 hours will provide a safe, legal, and accessible way for volunteers to continue populations without unnecessary logistical or financial barriers. Thank you for your time and for routing this request through traffic and engineering and city staff for evaluation. We look forward to your response and/or notice of any necessary other steps we need to follow. Sincerely, Evelyn McNulty, Executive Director on behalf of the Board of Directors Romero House Inc /haahb /h b/L\[ w9thw M&C No.2026-232 Report DateOctober 15, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaDevelopment and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT:Section 59 Amendment for 460 Milford Road/ 40 Sealedge Court AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Yeva Mattson Pankaj NalavdeAmy PoffenrothIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION ThatCommon Council rescind condition(a)imposed on August8, 2023, as part of the rezoning of the property located at460 Milford Road, also identified as PID55245153(previously PID 00405381). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item seeks Council's approval of a proposed variation to a Section 59 resolution affecting the property at 460 Milford Road / 40 Sealedge Court. The applicant is requesting a change to the existing condition(a)that limits building height to three storeys in order to permit a four-storey multi-unit residential building. Staff recommendrescinding Section 59 condition(a) thatlimitsheight in order toallow for the proposed development. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) On August 8, 2023, the Council approved a resolution to imposesix Section 59 conditions on the subject siteduring a rezoning. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Common Council established five priorities for their 2021-2026 term. Public Presentations align REPORT The Applicant proposes to amend condition (a)of the attached Section 59 Conditions in order to allow a 4-storey residential building. The property is limited to three storeys by these Section 59 Conditions. Sincetheimposition of conditions, the zoning standards for the Mid-Rise Residential Zone were amended to allow greaterheight. Public notice was posted on September 28, 2026for thisPublic Hearing as approved by Common Council and in accordance with the Community Planning Act. The site is located within the Stable Residential designation, an area identified in Plan SJ as generally built out, but with the potential for additional development that aligns with existing scale and context. 460 Milford Road was approved for a rezoning in 2023,which aligned with the intentof the Municipal Plan to add housing options and density in an established neighbourhood. The Applicant now proposes theaddition of 5 units,which would result in walk-out basements, and thus4 storeys in the rear,instead of the 3 storeys originallyproposed during the rezoning. 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 would result in a minor increase indensity on the approved site. The site is zoned Mid-Riseand allows six storeys. The new developmentproposal is 3 storeys atthe front and 4 storeys atthe rear,which is closer to a low-rise building typology than the maximum six-storey height allowed in the Mid-Rise zone.Additionally, the project could make a positive contribution to the neighbourhood by adding housing choice and a new housing typology. Two buildings of similar scale have already been built on the siteand are occupied. Based on the analysis of the proposed development under the Stable Residential designation, the proposal is consistent with the policies of the Municipal Plan, which support the evolution of existing neighbourhoods and the addition of housing options. Zoning The Mid-Rise Residential zone is intended to support 4to 6 storey residential developments. When the sitewas rezoned in 2023, the RM zone had a maximum height of 4storeys. Since then, with the Zoning Reform changes, the RM zone now allows a maximum height of 6storeys. The applicant is proposing to maintain 3 storeys at the front of the siteand4 storeys at the rear, which would allow for 5 additionalground-floor dwellingunits. Because more rockwas removed from the site than originally anticipated, the building would be no taller than the apartments already constructed. The added storey at the rear results solely from the slope of the land. The proposal would still meet all requirements of the RM zone for parking, landscaping, and amenity space. Provincial Statements of Public Interest (SPIs) development that aligns with existing settlement patterns and the utilization of existing public infrastructure and services. The proposed rezoning and development represent an extension of an existing, serviced neighbourhood. Section 59 Staff isonly recommending removal ofcondition (a) as some of the other conditions are still relevant until the completion of this project. Condition (a) is only concerned with height and conformity to the plans presented, which can beachieved by the current proposal. Since the other two buildings have been built and the size of the site itself restricts major changes to the current proposal, staff isrecommending removal of condition (a) fully rather than amending it. Conclusion The proposed application aligns with the adopted Municipal Plan, the Zoning By-Laws, Provincial Statements of Public Interest, and with agency reviews. Staff isrecommending approval of the removal ofcondition (a). INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person Building InspectionPamelaBentley Infrastructure Jeremy Clack GISYves Leger Traffic, Parking, and TransitJill DeMerchant Fire and Emergency Nathaniel Watson Public WorksBarb Crawford ATTACHMENT(S) Attachment 1: Section 59 Conditions COUNCIL NOTICE OF MOTION Received DateOctober 9, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Open or ClosedOpen Session Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: Public Presentation by the Lord Beaverbrook Rink Primary AuthorInput from CouncilInput from Staff Councillor Greg Norton PROPOSED MOTION: That the Common Clerk be directed to invite representatives of the Lord Beaverbrook Rink to make a public presentation to Common Council at a date mutually agreeable to the presenters and the and overall contribution to the Saint John community; and further, that the presentation be included on the official agenda with appropriate public notice in accordance with standard Council procedures. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Whereas the Lord Beaverbrook Rink is a long-standing community recreation facility located at 536 Main Street in Saint John; Whereas the rink currently provides and supports a range of community uses, including: Public skating during the annual October-to-March ice season; Ice rentals for schools, sport organizations, community groups, families, and other users; School skating opportunities that help local students participate in recreation and physical activity; A public walking track with weekday access and additional access during regular rentals; Special events and seasonal activities, including community roller-skating events outside the regular ice season; Space for hockey, recreational skating, training, community gatherings, and other activities; and Sponsorship and advertising opportunities that connect local organizations and businesses with community recreation. Whereas a presentation to Common Council would provide an opportunity for the Lord Beaverbrook Rink to highlight its current work, community impact, partnerships, operational opportunities, and future priorities; Whereas Common Council recognizes the value of accessible recreation, active living, youth opportunities, community gathering spaces, and facilities that contribute to quality of life in Saint John; Be It Resolved That: the Common Clerk be directed to schedule a public presentation from representatives of the Lord Beaverbrook Rink at an upcoming meeting of Common Council, at a Be It Further Resolved That: the Clerk provide appropriate notice and include the presentation on the official agenda in accordance with standard Council procedures. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT: Supports Council priorities related to belonging, community wellbeing, active living, inclusive public spaces, and strong neighbourhoods. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES: No direct financial commitment is requested through this motion. Any future requests or proposals arising from the presentation would be considered separately by Common Council through the appropriate process. INPUT FROM OTHERS: Lord Beaverbrook Rink representatives and City staff, as appropriate. ATTACHMENTS N/A /h b/L\[ bhL/9 hC ahLhb Received DateOctober 15, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Open or ClosedOpen Session Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECTʹ Evaluation of Permitting Process and Enforcement Primary AuthorInput from CouncilInput from Staff Councillor Ryan Moore PROPOSED MOTION: That the CAO be directedto evaluate the permitting process for businesses within residential area, including but not limited to the requirement for community outreach. In addition,to evaluate the tools and mechanisms available in regard to enforcing ongoing compliance and public safety. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT: SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES: INPUT FROM OTHERS: ATTACHMENTS: COMMON COUNCIL REPORT M&C No.2026-233 Report DateOctober 16, 2026 Meeting DateOctober 19, 2026 Service AreaDevelopment and Community Services Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT:Prescribed standardsfor anyland, building or structure containing a Non-Conforming Use as a Vehicle Repair Garage at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. AUTHORIZATION Primary AuthorDirectorExecutive LeadCAO Jennifer KirchnerPankaj NalavdeAmy PoffenrothIan Fogan RECOMMENDATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Application The applicant seeks to reconstruct a garage associated with a Vehicle Repair Garage at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. The applicant previously obtained a building permit to rebuild two of the four walls and replace the roof of the garage; during construction, the remainder of the structure collapsed, requiring the reconstruction of the entire building. The Vehicle Repair Garage has operated on the site since at least 1947 and is located on a Low-Rise Residential (RL) zoned property. It is anon-conforming use, as it was established before the current zoning came into force. In April 2022, the City issued a Zoning Confirmation Letter confirming the non-conforming status of the use and that a Motor Vehicle Inspection License could be approved for the site. Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) At its regular meetings onAugust 18, 2026,and September 15, 2026, PAC considered an application to reconstruct a garage associated with a Vehicle Repair Garagelocated at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. At its September 15 meeting, PAC formally recognized the Vehicle Repair Garage as a non-conforming use. This decision enabled PAC to consider the requestedvariances and the reconstruction of a building associated with a non-conforming use. Recognizing the history of the site, staff developed a series of varianceswith conditionsand site development standardsfor PAC's consideration that would bring the site into a better-defined state, addressing site access, parking and landscaping. PAC approved the variances associated with the site access, the location of the parking lot and onsite landscaping, subject to conditions (see Attachment B). PAC deferred the establishment of site standardson the property to Common Council, which Council can prescribe as standards for a Non-Conforming Use on the Property pursuant to subsection 61(1) of the Community Planning Act.This referral included thestandards recommended by staff in the PAC report and a request to consider changes to the Traffic By-Law to restrict on-street parking for the portion of McLaughlin Crescent adjacent to the Property. Once Council establishes the site standards, the application willreturn to PAC for a determination on the requested reconstruction, pursuant to subsection 60(2)(b) of the Community Planning Act and paragraph 2.8(2)(b) of the Zoning By-Law. Establishing sitestandardsfor the Non-Conforming Use through Council under Section 61 provides an enforcement mechanism: if the site is not maintained in accordance with the Standards, Council may, subject to notice requirements, have the necessary work carried out and recover the cost from the property owner. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends in favour of the submitted applicationwith the recommended Standards, as set outin the Recommendation section and Attachment A. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION(S) Not applicable. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Common Council established five priorities for their 2021-2026 term. The proposed site standardsfor the non-conforming use align REPORT Summary of the Application Municipal Plan The proposed application involves the reconstruction of a Vehicle Repair Garage, which is a long- standing non-conforming use. Through the recommended establishment of Standards, the reconstruction of the building would coincide with site and operational enhancements which will reduce the impact on the surrounding neighbourhood and willenhance the appearance and operations of the business. Service and Financial Outcomes Through the Planning Advisory Committee and Common Council, planning applications can be considered for approval based on the direction established throughCity by-lawsand the Community Planning Act.Development projects, including applications to reconstruct, redevelop or enhance existing site developmentare important as theyhave the potential togeneratenew revenue, increase overall economic vitality, and enhance our existing neighbourhoods.There is no direct financial impact to the City associated with the establishment of these site conditions. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS Name of Service Area/StakeholderName of Staff Person BuildingPam Bentley InfrastructureJeremy Clack Fire & Emergency Management Nathaniel Watson Parking, Traffic, and TransitJill DeMerchant & JillianGood Public WorksChris Phinney External Agencies Public UtilitiesRogers, Bell Alliant, Liberty Utilities, &Saint John Energy Natural Gas Enbridge/Emera ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Site Standardsfor the Non-Conforming Use at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Attachment B: PAC Variances Attachment C: PAC Chair Letter Attachment D: PAC StaffReport and Public Comments Attachment A Standards prescribed pursuant to s. 61(1) of the Community Planning Act for any land, building or structure containing a Non-Conforming Use as a Vehicle Repair Garage located at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Pursuant to s. 61(1) of the Community Planning Act, SNB 2017, c. 19, Common Council of the City of Saint John requires any land, building or structure containing anon-conforming use as a Vehicle Repair Garage at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent,shall be maintained and kept in a condition appropriate to the area in which it is located, in accordance with the following prescribed standards: Attachment B: PAC Variances Smallcity,bigheart. Petiteville,grand. PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE October 1, 2026 Her Worship Mayor Donna Noade Reardon and Members of Common Council ɎɎ1$Ȏ-µ´ɉ"µ´¬µ¸³¯´Ɏ4¹«Ɏ¬µ¸ɎŷɉŹɎ,©+§»®²¯´Ɏ"¸«¹©«´º Your Worship and Councillors: At its meetings on August 18, 2026 and September 15, 2026, thePlanning Advisory Committee considered the attached staff report regarding the reconstruction of a non-conforming use and PAC variances for 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. Atthe public meeting, staff madeapresentation. 32 Letters and 2 Petitions were received and areprovidedin the packet. The letters are attached. The PAC rendered the following decisions unanimously. Formalized that the Vehicle Repair Garage is a non-conforming use. Approved the following variances subject to conditions. 1.To permit two, two-way accesses on a frontage of less than 75 metres, subject to the following conditions: a.That each access be limited to a maximum width of 9 metres. b.That front yard landscaping and hard surfacing of the accesses be undertaken to formalize the site access locations. c.That the full-height curb on McLaughlin Crescent be reinstated to align with the new site accesses. 2.To permit a parking lot to be located within 2.4 metres of the front and rear property lines, and 2.85 metres of the side property line, subject to the following conditions: a.The required front, side, flankage and rear yard landscaping incorporate sod or hydroseed as the principal ground covering. b.That the front yard landscaping incorporates the planting of a minimum of 3 trees, with 1 tree to be located within each of the 3 landscaped areas identified on the site plan. c.That the side and rear yard landscaping, adjacent to 2 McLaughlin Crescent and 6 Barbara Crescent, incorporate screening as per the requirements established in Sections 5.3 and 6.1(j) of the Zoning By-Law. P.O.Box1971SaintJohn,NBCanadaE2L4L1 C.P.1971SaintJohn,N.-B.CanadaE2L4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Page 2of 2 3. To permit a reduction in the landscaping areas from 4.5 metres to 2.4 metres for the front yard and from 6 metres to 2.4 metres in the rear yard, subject to the following conditions: a. The required front and rear yard landscaping incorporate sod or hydroseed as the principle ground covering. b. That the front yard landscaping incorporate the planting of 3 trees, with 1 planting located within each of the 3 landscaped areas identified on the site plan. Send the application to Common Council for the establishment of Site Conditions on the property as presented in the staff report, as per Sections 61(1) to 61(5) of the Community Planning Act. In addition, PAC -Law, to eliminate on street parking for a portion of McLaughlin Crescent. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Jennifer Kirchner at Jennifer.Kirchner@saintjohn.ca. Sincerely Yours, Peter Corfield, Vice Chair c: Pankaj Nalavde, RPP, MCIP, Director of Community Planning and Housing Attachments: Staff Report for the August 18, 2026 Meeting Supplementary Staff Report for the September 15 Meeting Copies of correspondence received from the public. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Small city, big heart. Petiteville,grandcœur. Date: September 10, 2026 To:Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting:Tuesday, September 15, 2026, at 6 PM From: Jennifer Kirchner, RPP, MCIP, Senior Planner Application 26-157: Non-Conforming Use and PAC Variances Location/ Address: 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 18, 2026, the application for the reconstruction of a possible non-conforming use and associated PAC variances was tabled at the regular PAC meeting pending additional information. The following materials serve as a supplementary report to the original staff reportconsidered at the meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Area History and Non-Conforming Use Status One of the key elements of this application isthe determination as to whether the Vehicle Repair Garage can be considered a non-conforming use. Based on the information gathered prior to the August PAC Meeting, it was understood that the Vehicle Repair Garage was established in the 1960s. Since the PAC Meeting, new information has been compiled,and an updated timeline is provided below: April 23, 1921:Westmorland Heightssubdivision planwas registered, whichcreated an early layout for the neighbourhood, includingMcLaughlin Crescent. September 24, 1947: Page 10 of the Wednesday edition of the Saint John Times Globe included an advertisement for Landry’s Garage, located on Westmorland Avenue. April 6, 1953:Page 12 of the Monday edition of the Saint John Times Globe, included an advertisement for Landry’s Garage, located at84 Westmorland Avenue.Based on the civic addressingpattern, it is likely that 84 Westmorland Avenue is the same location as 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. November 7, 1961:An amending subdivision plan for Westmorland Heightswas registered, featuringthe current road and lot layout. The subdivision plan also d that P. J. Landry owned lotsat the location of 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. March 9, 1968: Page 29of the Saturdayedition of the Saint John Times Globe, included an advertisement forLandry’s Garage, located at 4 McLaughlin Crescent. February 12, 1975:Page 2 of the Wednesday edition of the Saint John Times Globe, included an article regarding the February 11, 1975 PAC Meeting. It involved an P.O.Box1971SaintJohn,NBCanadaE2L4L1 C.P.1971SaintJohn,N.-B.CanadaE2L4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 2 of 6 application torelocate McLaughlin Crescent. The house was owned by Charles Bettle who ran a garage on the adjoining property. The article referenced a neighbour who indicated that Mr. Bettle’s garage was built prior to the establishment of zoning laws for the area. Based on the new information, it is likely that a Vehicle Repair Garage operated at this location since at least 1947. While a Zoning By-Law was in place as of 1937, the City did not have a Master Plan until its adoption in principle on January 6, 1946. Page 27 of the within residential areas there had been a scattering of residences that had been converted into small service shops. It also noted that amendments to the Zoning By-Law served to prevent the further establishment of similar non-conforming uses. Building Permit Timeline A building permit was issued on September 12, 2025, to rebuild two of four load bearing walls and replace the pitched roof of the existing repair garage with a flat roof at a height of 12 feet. It did not authorize demolition of the building. The building inspector met the applicant on site on September 3, 2025, to discuss replacement of the roof, at which time complete demolition was not raised. No further communication was received from the owner or contractor. A neighbouring resident reported that the building was taken down on the evening of April 18, 2026. The inspector attended on April 20, 2026, and found the garage fully demolished with only the existing slab remaining, the first indication to the City that the entire building had been removed. Following a further site visit on April 27, 2026, the inspector wrote to the owner and contractor directing that work stop and that a new permit be applied for. At no point prior to April 20, 2026, was the inspector advised, verbally or in writing, that the intention was to demolish the entire building. Decision Options If PAC determines that the Vehicle Repair Garage is a non-conforming use, they have several options in which to move forward. Denial: Non-conforming uses are granted a certain degree of protection to enable its continued existence despite changes to the Zoning By-Law. While the use is allowed to continue, the intention is that over time, non-conforming uses will relocate to more suitable locations. This may coincide with the deterioration of the buildings or when the intensity of the use outgrows its location. As such, the non-conforming status does not guarantee that approvals will be granted to either reconstruct buildings or to allow the use to expand, as these approvals would serve to extend the use of the site for non-conforming purposes. PAC has the jurisdictional authority to deny the application to reconstruct the demolished Vehicle Repair Garage structure. A denial of the application would prevent the rebuilding of the Vehicle Repair Garage structure, which would serve to limit the number of repair bays on the property. The denial would not, however, prevent the continued operation of the Vehicle Repair Garage out of the remaining blue garage building. The use would be P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 3 of 6 allowed to continue operations under the existing site layout, without being subject to any requirements for site improvements or enhancements. Approval with No Conditions: PAC may choose to approve the reconstruction of the Vehicle Repair Garage and PAC Variances without conditions. This approach would allow the reconstruction to occur based on the proposed site plan and would not tie the redevelopment to conditions intended to enhance the site conditions. This form of approval would result in limited site improvements including the reduction of the site accesses, but the broader site improvements that would be established through conditions would not be applicable. Approval with Conditions: A third option before PAC is to approve the reconstruction of the Vehicle Repair Garage and PAC Variances with conditions. This approach would allow the reconstruction to occur subject to a series of conditions that would seek to improve the site conditions and functionality of the site. While a series of conditions have been proposed, PAC would have the discretion to consider additional conditions. This could include conditions involving securities or deposits or establishing limitations on the number of vehicles that can be located on the property. As the applicant has indicated a willingness to meet the conditions of the approval, this may be a viable option in which to move forward. Using aerial imagery, staff has tracked the vehicle volume from 2004 to 2025. This provides a snapshot of onsite vehicle parking (including parking for the business and dwelling unit) and provides insight into the intensity of the use. During these years, the number of vehicles parked onsite has ranged from 2 to 28. Year2004 20062008 2010 2012 2014 2015 20162018 2020 2022 2025 Number 4 2 16 27 13 3 15 11 18 16 13 28 of Vehicles If PAC were to incorporate a condition that limits the number of vehicles that can be parked onsite, it would be recommended to establish the number based on historical information and the proposed onsite parking layout. Refer the Application to Common Council refer the application for the reconstruction of the structure associated with the non-conforming use to Common Council for a decision. Sections 61(1)-61(5) of the Community Planning Act provide a mechanism under which Common Council has authority over non-conforming uses. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 4 of 6 61(1) The council may require that any land, building or structure containing a non- conforming use shall be maintained and kept in a condition appropriate to the area in which it is located, in accordance with standards prescribed by the council. 61(2) If standards have been prescribed under subsection (1), the council may give to the owner and to the occupier of the land, building or structure written notice, indicating (a)the prescribed standards, (b)the consequences of failing to comply with the standards, and (c)the right of appeal under section 120. 61(3) If the standards prescribed under subsection (1) are not complied with, the council may (a)perform, at the expense of the owner or occupier, the work required to meet the standards, or (b)require the termination of the use. This approach outlines mechanisms for enforcement under which Common Council would have the authority and jurisdiction to either undertake site improvements to bring the property into alignment with prescribed conditions or to require the cessation of the use. It is important to note that PAC would have the jurisdiction over PAC Variances and would therefore be required to render a decision on that portion of the application. This approach would allow the reconstruction to occur subject to a series of conditions that would seek to improve the site conditions and functionality of the use. Compliance If approval is granted, there are processes in place to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval. Building Permit If approval is granted for the reconstruction of the building, the applicant will be required to receive a building permit prior to construction occurring. Building Permits are reviewed and approved by City Building Inspectors, Engineers and Development Officers. The review ensures that the proposed development aligns with Municipal regulations in addition to the National Building Code. Building Permits are approved subject to conditions, which regulate the development. If the approvals are granted subject to conditions, these conditions will be incorporated into the Building Permit approval. Prior to the Building Permit being closed, the Building Inspector will ask t the completion of these conditions. as non-compliant. If a Building Permit is non-compliant, City staff will work with the applicant to achieve compliance. If compliance is not achieved, further enforcement actions will be taken. This traditionally includes the registration of the violations on the Land Gazette. This Land P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 5 of 6 have been addressed. Security or Deposit PAC may also choose to add a condition requiringthata security or deposit be taken for the development. The taking of security or deposit provides a financial incentive to the applicant, as the money would only be refunded upon the completion of the associated conditions. Additionally, a security or deposit could also be utilized by the City to undertake work to rectify non-compliance with the conditions. This process would be subject to broader considerations and would be limited based on the value of the security or deposit taken. Council Authority Lastly, if the applicant fails to comply with the conditions of approval, staff can bring forth the non-conforming use to Common Council for the establishment of conditions and the theoretical enforcement of said conditions. Sections 61(1)-61(5) of the Community Planning Act which outlines Common Council’s authority over non-conforming uses does not limit the process to . This process can be undertaken for any non- conforming use and provides a mechanism to enhance and integrate non-conforming uses into the surrounding built form. Enforcement Regardless of the decision rendered, all properties within the City are subject to compliance with Municipal and Provincial regulations. The following are a few of the Municipal Programs and By-Laws in place that serve as enforcement tools. -Law -Law establishes regulations for the use of streets within City limits. Some of the regulations within this By-Law which would be applicable to this use include: . Prohibiting vehicles or trailers from being repaired while on a street. Noise By-Law The Noise By-Law establishes regulations related to noise and sound within City limits. This includes the restricted use of domestic outdoor power tools or construction equipment between the hours of 9pm and 7am. Property By-Law Compliance Programs The City has an enforcement program which addresses the appearance, safety, and integrity of buildings and properties across the City. This program is a complaint-based program, which relies on members of the public to report a property for inspection. Traffic Update Currently, parking is permitted on both sides of McLaughlin Crescent from Westmorland Road to Barbara Crescent aside from specific prohibitions laid out in the City's Traffic By- P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 6 of 6 Law or Provincial Motor Vehicle Act that are communicated by on-street parking signage such as blocking driveways, blocking a fire hydrant, parking within 10 metres of traffic lights, or 5 metres of an intersection. Upon further review with this development file before the Planning Advisory Committee, the City's Transportation Services team believes that parking on both sides of this section of McLaughlin Crescent would prevent or impede the passing of other vehicles on this two-way street given available width, which is also not permitted as per the City's Traffic By-Law. To maximize remaining on-street parking availability, Transportation Services intends to direct that parking on the north side of this section of McLaughlin (the side with the subject auto repair garage) be signed as "No Parking Anytime", thereby leaving parking along the majority of the south side of this street section. Transportation Services also believe that any further parking restrictions on this section of McLaughlin Crescent would require a specific change to the city's Traffic By- Law that would need to be considered by Common Council at a later date. Transportation Services understands the planned prohibition of parking on the north side of McLauglin Crescent would address some concern raised during the prior PAC public hearing as it would mitigate narrowing of the street previously caused by parking on both sides. However, Transportation Services cautions that there is very limited ability to further limit which vehicles are parked on the remaining street sections in the vicinity of the repair garage without intervention of by-law changes supported by Common Council. In other words, there is virtually no way with the proposed plan to prevent vehicles associated with the garage to be parked on-street where on-street parking is permitted, and with further limited on-street parking capacity as a result of the proposed plan, this may further impede on-street parking capacity available to area residents. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Historical Information P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Small city, big heart. Petiteville,grandcœur. Date: August 13, 2026 To:Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting:Tuesday, August 18, 2026, at 6 PM From: Jennifer Kirchner, RPP, MCIP, Senior Planner Application 26-157: Non-Conforming Use and PAC Variances Location/ Address: 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On July 27, 2026, Anas Nasan, on behalf of Better Steering and Automotive Inc. appliedto reconstruct a building containing a potential non-conforming use. The approval would enable the Vehicle Repair Garage to be reconstructed on the Low-Rise Residential (RL) property. The applicanthas described the project as the reconstruction of a 24’ by 42’ building to be located on the same footprint as the recently demolished structure. The applicant has also applied forvariances to the development standards of the Zoning By-Law. Approval of the reconstruction of the potential non-conforming use and the associated variances would permit the continued use of the site for a Vehicle Repair Garage. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONTO PAC These include: a)Denial of both the reconstruction and variances. b)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances with conditions. c)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances without conditions. d) e)Send the application to Common Council for consideration. P.O.Box1971SaintJohn,NBCanadaE2L4L1 C.P. 1971SaintJohn,N.-B.CanadaE2L4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 2 of 16 STAFF REPORT REQUEST Application 26-157: Restoration of a Non-Conforming Use and PAC Variances Property Owners(s): Better Steering and Automotive Inc. Applicant: Anas Nasan PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Civic Address: 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent PID: 55246789 Lot Size: 1,659.88 m² Plan Designation: Stable Residential Current Zoning: Low-Rise Residential (RL) LEGAL JURISDICTION The Community Planning Act under s. 60(2)(b) authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to permit the repair or restoration of a building or structure containing a non- conforming use, that has been damaged to the extent of at least half of the whole building or structure, exclusive of the foundation. Pursuant to the CPA (see, e.g., City of Fredericton v. Liu, 2021 NBQB 203) a true non-conforming use must have: 1) been lawful at some point prior to a by-law change which made it non-conforming; and 2) continued since the time it became non-conforming (see, e.g., City of Fredericton v Liu, 2021 NBQB 203). The Community Planning Act under s. 55(1)(b) authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to permit reasonable variances from the requirements … of a zoning by-law, if it is of the opinion that the variance is desirable for the development of a parcel of land or a building or structure and is in keeping with the general intent of the by-law and any plan under this \[Community Planning\] Act affecting the development. FINAL ACTIONS The reconstruction of a Non-Conforming Use and the Variances may be granted, denied, or granted with conditions by the PAC at its meeting on August 18, 2026. The application may also be tabled for further information or sent to Common Council for consideration. APPLICATION SUMMARY The applicant seeks to reconstruct a Vehicle Repair Garage that was demolished in 2026. The Vehicle Repair Garage, established in the 1960s, is located on a Low-Rise Residential (RL) property at 4-6 McLaughlin Cresent. The applicant indicated that the use is non- conforming, and as such, the reconstruction of a building associated with a non- conforming use is subject to approval of the Planning Advisory Committee. City records P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 3 of 16 cannot confirm the planning mechanism under which the Vehicle Repair Garage was established or that the use meets the criteria to be considered a non-conforming use. Site development, including the reconstruction of a building that does not conform to a zone standard, is subject to all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-Law. This includes site development regulations associated with site access, landscaping, and parking. The application proposes enhancements to onsite landscaping, parking and parking lot screening. Variances are being requested for reductions to landscaping, the location of the parking lot and to permit two site accesses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO PAC a)Denial of both the reconstruction and variances. b)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances with conditions. c)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances without conditions. d) e)Send the application to Common Council for consideration. If PAC were to proceed with approval of the requested applications, it is suggested that the approvals be subject to conditions. That the Planning Advisory Committee, as per Section 2.8(2)(b) of the Zoning By-Law, approve the request to restore a building containing a non-conforming use located at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent, subject to the following conditions: a)The parking lot and site accesses shall be developed and maintained with a paved surface enclosed with permanent continuous cast-in-place concrete curbing and all parking spaces shall be delineated by painted lines on the paved surface. b)The parking lot be developed with screening for those portions of the parking lot that abut the residential properties located at 2 McLaughlin Crescent and 6 Barbara Crescent. The screening shall align with the requirements established in Sections 5.3 and 6.1(j) of the Zoning By-Law. c)The parking lot contain a minimum of 13 parking spaces as required with the Zoning By-Law for the Vehicle Repair Garage and associated Dwelling Unit. This shall include barrier-free parking spaces as required by the Barrier-Free Design Building Code regulation for the Province of New Brunswick. d)That operations of the Vehicle Repair Garage, including the repair of vehicles and storage of materials and parts, be limited to the interior of the two garage buildings. e)That onsite garbage storage be developed as per Section 5.4 of the Zoning By-Law. f)That the applicant submit a building permit application for the roof structure which connects the garage and the dwelling unit. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 4 of 16 g)That all surface drainage from the parking and vehicle maintenance areas (both interior and exterior) must be contained within the property boundaries and treated with an oil-grit separator before discharging to the municipal sewer system. That the Planning Advisory Committee approve the following variances subject to the recommended conditions. 1.To permit two, two-way accesses on a frontage of less than 75 metres, subject to the following conditions: a)That each access be limited to a maximum width of 9 metres. b)That front yard landscaping and hard surfacing of the accesses be undertaken to formalize the site access locations. c)That the full-height curb on McLaughlin Crescent be reinstated to align with the new site accesses. 2.To permit a parking lot to be located within 2.4 metres of the front and rear property lines, and 2.85 metres of the side property line, subject to the following conditions: a)The required front, side, flankage and rear yard landscaping incorporate sod or hydroseed as the principal ground covering. b)That the front yard landscaping incorporates the planting of a minimum of 3 trees, with 1 tree to be located within each of the 3 landscaped areas identified on the site plan. c)That the side and rear yard landscaping, adjacent to 2 McLaughlin Crescent and 6 Barbara Crescent, incorporate screening as per the requirements established in Sections 5.3 and 6.1(j) of the Zoning By-Law. 3.To permit a reduction in the landscaping areas from 4.5 metres to 2.4 metres for the front yard and from 6 metres to 2.4 metres in the rear yard, subject to the following conditions: a)The required front and rear yard landscaping incorporate sod or hydroseed as the principle ground covering. b)That the front yard landscaping incorporate the planting of 3 trees, with 1 planting located within each of the 3 landscaped areas identified on the site plan. DECISION HISTORY As established using historic orthophotos, the Vehicle Repair Garage was constructed prior to 1967. As per the 1967 images, the site contained a one-unit dwelling and two buildings associated with the commercial operations. The Zoning By-Law (adopted May 25, 1937) and the associated zoning map (September 1, 1963) surrounding neighbourhood as being zoned for residential land uses, through the Two P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 5 of 16 Family Dwelling zone. The City records do not indicate the mechanism under which the Vehicle Repair Garage was developed, or any variances to the commercial development standards of the time. Staff are unable to determine if the Vehicle Repair Garage is a non- conforming use. It is believed that a Vehicle Repair Garage has been in continuous operation on the site since its original construction. The subject site and land use were the subject of a discussion at an October 28, 1975, meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee. The PAC was in receipt of complaints made by neighbouring residents associated with the Vehicle Repair Garage. The PAC minutes from the meeting indicate that the property had been taken to PAC on three separate occasions to deal with the Vehicle Repair Garage. The letter was received after PAC, at its September 11, 1975 Meeting, denied a request to permit the operation of an insurance business from the site in addition to the Vehicle Repair Garage. The complaints were associated with: The grounds being kept in poor condition. Tires and other related goods on display outside of the garage. No attempt having been made to pave or upgrade the site entrances. The poor condition of the parking lot. And that the insurance business was in operation despite PAC’s denial of the request. At a subsequent meeting of PAC on November 16, 1976, the Building Inspector indicated that the insurance business had ceased operations and that the property owner had undertaken some cleanup of the site. In 2025, Building Permit 25-0161 was issued for the roof replacement of the 24’ by 42’ building that formed part of the Vehicle Repair Garage. In spring 2026, staff were informed that the building was demolished. No application was made for a demolition permit. A building permit application was made to reconstruct the 24’ by 42’ Vehicle Repair Garage. ANALYSIS Proposal The proposed application would permit the reconstruction of a 24’ by 42’, potential non- conforming Vehicle Repair Garage at 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent. The subject site, which is zoned Low-Rise Residential (RL), does not permit a Vehicle Repair Garage. The applicant has indicated that the Vehicle Repair Garage is a non-conforming use. The reconstruction of any buildings or structures associated with a non-conforming use is subject to approval by the Planning Advisory Committee. The City records do not indicate the mechanism under which the Vehicle Repair Garage was developed, or any variances to the commercial development standards of the time. Staff are unable to determine if the Vehicle Repair Garage is a non-conforming use. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 6 of 16 Section 8.5 of the Zoning By-Law allows the reconstructionand repair of buildings that do not conform to the zone standards provided that the structure otherwise meets all other provisions of the Zoning By-Law. This would include site development standards such as requirements for landscaping, parking lot screening and parking lot design. The applicant is requesting variances to the development standards set forth in the Zoning By-Law associated with parking and landscaping. A review of the variances is incorporated within the body of this report for consideration. Approval of these applications would permit the redevelopment of the Vehicle Repair Garage and would enable its ongoing use. The requested variances would, in turn, enable the site development to continue at a standard otherwise not permitted within the City. Site and Neighbourhood The subject site is located on the east side of the City, in the Westmorland Heights area. The site is located on the northeast side of McLaughlin Cresent, near the intersection of McLaughlin Crescent and Westmorland Road. The property is located inside the City’s Primary Development Area. Prior to 1967, the property was developed to contain a one-unit dwelling and two buildings which were utilized for a Vehicle Repair Garage. It is understood that the site has continuously been utilized for a Vehicle Repair Garage since its initial development in the 1960s. was established. The subject site is located within a residential neighbourhood that contains a mixture of one-unit, two-unit, townhouses and small-scale apartment buildings. These lands are zoned Low-Rise Residential (RL) and Mid-Rise Residential (RM) respectively. Located on McLaughlin Crescent are two sites that are zoned Local Commercial (CL) that contain a hair salon (personal service) Plan and Policy Alignment The subject site is designated Stable Residential within the Municipal Plan. The Stable Residential designation is utilized for existing neighbourhoods across the City that are generally built-out and are not anticipated to receive major change over the planning period. Policy LU-86 indicates that compatible uses, such as convenience stores, home occupations, parks and community facilities, are permitted within the designation without an amendment to the Municipal Plan. The Municipal Plan addresses the existence of non-conforming uses within the City. Given the historic nature of the City, there are existing land uses that exist in locations that may not be appropriate under today’s best practices for land use planning. While these uses cannot be forced to relocate, the Community Planning Act establishes a process to address these non-conforming uses. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 7 of 16 Policy LU-127 establishes a framework for addressing non-conforming uses within the City. Continue to allow non-conforming uses to carry on with their operations in accordance with the relevant requirements of the New Brunswick Community Planning Act, however, the City will encourage the relocation of incompatible uses to more appropriate locations in accordance with the land use hierarchy set out in the Municipal Plan. Given that non-conforming uses can involve a range of land uses, the level of compatibility with the surrounding area can vary. Some community and commercial uses, such as parks, convenience stores, and home occupations are as being compatible within residential neighbourhoods. The Zoning By-Law further contemplates this intention through the development of the Local Commercial (CL) and Neighbourhood Community Facility (CFN) zones, which support a range of uses that neighbourhoods. For those types of non-conforming uses, a rezoning can bring the property into conformance. Some commercial uses are subject to conditions of use, which are established through the Zoning By-Law. The conditions of use serve to regulate site selection, establishes minimum separation distances from other uses including residential zones and reduces . The Vehicle Repair Garage use is one such example, as a condition of use prevents them from being located adjacent to residentially zoned land. The subject site is zoned Low-Rise Residential (RL). The RL zone is intended to support a range of low-density, ground oriented residential development, as well as limited commercial uses such as home occupations and home day cares. The RL zone does not permit the development of a Vehicle Repair Garage, nor is the use permitted to be developed as a home occupation. The Vehicle Repair Garage was believed to have been established in the 1960s. The City records do not indicate the approval process associated with the development or any variances to the development standards in place at the time of development. City Records do indicate that the Vehicle Repair Garage was in operation in 1975. The Zoning By-Law permits the development of a Vehicle Repair Garage within certain commercial (Corridor Commercial, Regional Commercial, General Commercial, Rural General Commercial, and Regional Commercial Residential) and industrial (Light Industrial and Medium Industrial) zones. For those commercial zones that permit the establishment of a Vehicle Repair Garage, the use is subject to Conditions of Use. The condition of use prohibits the use from being established on a lot that is adjacent to a residential zone. Therefore, the rezoning of the P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 8 of 16 property to a commercial zone would not bring the property into conformance with the Zoning By-Law. Non-conforming uses are regulated in s. 60 of the Community Planning Act and are addressed in Section 2.8(2) of the Zoning By-Law. under which the Vehicle Repair Garage was granted Municipal approval, they are unable to verify if the use can be considered a non-conforming use. 2.8(2)(b) establishes that the Committee may authorize The repair or restoration or use of a building or structure containing a non- conforming use which, in the opinion of the Committee, has been damaged to the extent of at least half of the whole building or structure, exclusive of the foundation; Section 8.5 of the Zoning By-Law further addresses existing building and structures located in all zones. This Section establishes the following: Nothing in this By-law shall prevent any repair, renovation, reconstruction, or enlargement of a building or structure that does not conform to a zone standard provided: (a)The repair, renovation, reconstruction, or enlargement does not further reduce the zone standard that does not conform to this By- law; and (b)All other applicable provisions of this By-law are satisfied. -conforming use, the Committee would have the jurisdictional authority to authorize the reconstruction of the building and to render decisions associated with any variances to standards within the Zoning By-Law. As - Law including landscaping, parking lot standards and site screening. The submitted site plan incorporates the following development standards as required in the Zoning By-Law: Parking lot screening for the side and rear yards adjacent to residential lots. The screening includes the existing rear yard landscaping and a fence on the side yard. Provision of a minimum of 13 parking stalls as required for the Vehicle Repair Garage and Dwelling Unit. The site plan illustrates 15 parking stalls. Existing and proposed landscaping areas in the side, rear, and front yards. In addition, as per the requirements of the Zoning By-Law, the applicant will be required to undertake site improvements. This will include but not be limited to: Upgrading the site accesses and parking lot with hardsurfacing, and to delineate the parking stalls with painted lines and permanent curbs. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 9 of 16 Provision of barrier-free parking stalls as per the requirements of the National Building Code. Upgrading the garbage bins to meet the garbage enclosure requirements. The applicant has requested that the following variances be considered for this application. Zoning RequirementRequested VarianceAnalysis 4.1(2)(b)To permit 2 two-way The existing site development has The number of two-accesses on a established a site access that extends 26 way accesses shall frontage of less than metres across the lot frontage. This has be limited to one for 75 metres. been used to provide access to the each lot frontage parking lot, blue vehicle repair garage except when the lot and dwelling unit. The access area, has a frontage over which includes 7 metres of Road Right of 75 metres then two Way, has also been utilized for vehicle accesses are parking. permitted if a minimum of 20 The proposed site development will metres is provided reduce the site access from 26 metres to between the two 9-metre-wide accesses. Through the centreline of each formalization of the site accesses, it will access measured at serve to reduce the width of the site the street line. access, ensure controlled access in and out of the site, and will eliminate the use of the front yard for additional parking. 4.2(5)(i) To permit a portion of Section 4.2(5)(i) of the Zoning By-Law A parking lot shall the parking lot to be requires that parking lots be located not be provided in developed within the outside the required landscaped areas. any landscaped area required 4.5m front This ensures physical separation required by Part 6 or yard, 6m rear yard between the parking lot and adjacent within: and 3m side yard properties and that landscaping and (i)Three metres of a landscaping areas. screening can be provided on site. side or rear lot line if the abutting This variance would Staff undertook a review of the site plan lot is located in a permit the parking lot to determine the site development Residential zone to be located within limitations based on the site layout, and does not 2.4 metres of the building placement and measurements. contain or permit front yard, side yard a commercial use and the rear yard. Front Yard as defined by the The parking area (13 stalls) accounts for subsection 4.1(2); 35.66 metres of the overall 41.3 metre lot depth. This leaves 5.64 metres for front and rear yard landscaping and onsite garbage enclosure. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 10 of 16 Zoning Requirement Requested VarianceAnalysis The proposed layout identifies a 2.4 metre setback between the parking lot and the front yard. Rear Yard The proposed layout establishes a separation distance of 8.5 metres to 11.4 metres between the building to the property line. Within this space, a 6m- wide driving aisle will provide two-way onsite circulation. This provides 2.5 metres for a minimum landscaped buffer. Side Yard The proposed layout establishes an 8.85 metre setback from the building to the property line. Within this space, a 6m- wide driving aisle will provide two-way onsite circulation. This provides for a 2.85 metre landscaped buffer. 6.1(f) To reduce the Section 6.1(f) of the Zoning By-Law In a Commercial required landscaping outlines landscaping requirements for zone the following areas: Commercial zoned lands. While the site areas shall be 4.5m front yard is zoned Residential, it is recommended landscaped: 6m rear yard that landscaping be undertaken based on (i)All required front the Commercial zone, due to the existing and flankage This variance would commercial use. yards; reduce the (ii)All required landscaping areas to The proposed variances would reduce yards that abut a 2.4 metres for the the landscaping areas for the front and lot in a front and rear yards.rear yards of the property. Residential or Community As illustrated above, staff reviewed the Facility zone; site plan to determine the site and development limitations based on the (iii)All other areas site layout, building placement and not occupied by measurements. a building, structure, Based on the proposed parking layout parking area, and requirement for onsite circulation, driveway, the applicant would be unable to meet P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 11 of 16 Zoning Requirement Requested VarianceAnalysis walkway, or the landscaping requirements for the amenity space. front and rear yard. Both the front and rear yards landscaping areas are limited due to the proposed building location, 6- metre driving aisle and parking space dimensions. The requested variances are associated with site access, parking, and landscaping. As sites evolve and restoration work occurs, it provides an opportunity to address existing site conditions and have sites achieve better alignment with the development standards outlined in the Zoning By-Law. Some variances, such as the request to permit two site accesses, is directly tied to the existing site layout and buildings. The variance acknowledges this existing state but through conditions of approval, the site will benefit from streamlined access and an enhanced user experience. Other variances are requested to reduce development standards associated with landscaping and the location of the parking lot. These development standards seek to provide visual and physical separation between the private and public realm, and to reduce the impact between residential and non-residential land uses. These variances would seek to reduce the landscaping area of the property and enable the parking lot to be in closer proximity to adjacent residential properties and the public street. When considering these variances, it is important to consider the impact they may have on the surrounding properties and to determine if other development standards can compensate for the loss of landscaped areas. Through variance conditions, it can help to ensure that the remaining landscaping areas are developed in a manner that still meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law. Service Area Review The planning application was circulated to City service areas, external agencies, and governmental departments for feedback. Feedback provided through the review have been incorporated into the proposed conditions. Responses from the review are below. InternalService Areas Feedback Infrastructure and All surface drainage from parking and vehicle maintenance Saint John Water areas (both interior and exterior) must be contained within the property boundaries and treated with an oil-grit separator before discharging to the municipal sewer system. Wastewater that does not meet the requirements of Section 21 of the Water and Sewerage By-law may not be discharged to the municipal sewer system. Prior to permit approvals, the developer is required to prepare a storm drainage submission demonstrating that the proposed changes will not increase the peak rate of P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 12 of 16 stormwater runoff from the property, nor create any kind of adverse drainage effect. Recommend establishing the north side of McLaughlin Crescent between Westmorland Road and Barbara Crescent as a permanent no-parking zone. Building No concerns with the proposal to rebuild the garage in the location of the former structure or the requested variances. The proposed structure will need to meet the standards of the 2020 National Building Code and Energy Code. No deviation from the current code is permitted. The proposed structure and site development will be required to incorporate barrier-free parking stalls and the new structure will need to be barrier-free accessible and meet the standards of the Barrier-Free Design Building Code regulation for the Province of New Brunswick. In addition, a roof structure which connects the garage and the dwelling unit was undertaken without a building permit. The applicant will be required to apply for a building permit for the site work, which shall require submitted plans for the roof structure. Emergency The review conducted by the Saint John Fire Department is a Management review for compliance with the National Fire Code, 2020 Edition, and the National Building Code, 2020 Edition, and city ordinance as it pertains to fire and life safety. The items contained herein are not deemed to be an exhaustive list, and additional items may be noted as the project continues. It is important to understand that it is ultimately the owner’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the National Building and Fire Codes, and inspections and reviews are audits, not comprehensive lists of design, construction, operation, or maintenance deficiencies. The drawing submitted as part of the application raises several questions which should be answered prior to construction. The proposed development may exceed the existing infrastructure’s ability to provide sufficient fire suppression water. An analysis of the required and available fire flow shall be conducted and provided to Saint John Fire Prevention for review. Such an analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the fire underwriters survey 2025. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 13 of 16 If the results of the analysis reveal that there is inadequate water the proponent shall address it through one or more of the following measures: iUpgrades to the existing infrastructure, iiInstallation of residential sprinklers in conformance with NFPA 13, 13R or 13D depending on the nature of the development, or iiiSupplement the existing infrastructure with another source of water for fire suppression. Regarding the construction and modernization of the garage. The proponent shall identify all changes to service, including modernized technology. For example, if the business always performed oil changes, and they’re going to continue to perform them but they’re changing their equipment for the collection or storage of used oil it must be identified. The Saint John Fire Department is particularly interested in a.Anything related to the storage, handling, and use of flammable and combustible liquids including but not limited to: i.Windshield washer fluid ii.Used oil iii.New oil b.Any hazardous processes including but not limited to: i.Hot works such as welding or grinding ii.Body work involving paint spraying, dipping, or coating. Regarding the landscaping comments and request for variance, the landscaping in this area shall incorporate the principles and practices of FireSmart into land development planning. The proponent shall include for all plans a FireSmart assessment, and detailed plan for landscaping, land development, and planting in this area which complies with the best practices of FireSmart Canada. Before commencement of site preparation or construction, a Construction Fire Safety Plan must be prepared and submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. Such a plan shall conform to the requirements of the following: a. National Building Code, 2020 Edition Part 8 – Safety Measures at Construction and Demolition Sites, and P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 14 of 16 b. National Fire Code, 2020 Edition Section 2.8 – Emergency Planning (specifically Articles 2.8.2.1. Measures in a Fire Safety Plan, and 2.8.2.11. Construction and Demolition Sites) The proponent must prepare and submit to the Saint John Fire Department a Fire Safety Plan for the operation and care of the building, its systems, and occupants. a. National Fire Code, 2020 Edition Section 2.8 – Emergency Planning When preparing a Fire Safety Plan, the proponent should keep in mind that the travel time from the nearest active Fire Station is 2 minutes. When call taking, dispatch, and turnout times are factored in, the total ‘response time’ from call initiation to the first Fire Truck on scene is estimated at 4 minutes +/- and 9 minutes +/- for the second, third, and fourth Fire Trucks to arrive. The Saint John Fire Department has no objections to this planning application. However, the construction and development of the lot will still require a building permit, and shall conform to the National Building Code and National Fire Code of Canada. ParksNo concerns. Trafficand Parking 1.The site shall be fully paved and provide clearly defined, Commissionlined parking spaces throughout the parking area. Historical parking patterns, based on site observations and a review of historical photographs, indicate that parking demand has often exceeded the formal parking supply, with vehicles frequently parking within the lot and along portions of the municipal right-of-way. As a result, on-street parking shall be restricted in accordance with existing parking regulations on McLaughlin Crescent. 2.McLaughlin Crescent is too narrow to safely accommodate parking on both sides of the street while maintaining adequate traffic operations and access for maintenance and emergency vehicles. 3.Street trees shall be required along McLaughlin Crescent in lieu of shrubs to maintain and improve traffic sightlines and enhance overall roadway safety. 4.A full-height curb shall be installed along the street frontage between the two proposed driveways. TransitNo comments. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 15 of 16 Operations The use of on street parking for customers and disabled vehicles has and will continue to create a hinderance to snow clearing. The design of the hardscaped areas on the property for parking should be designed to ensure that no excessive stormwater is diverted onto the roadway. GIS No concerns. External Agencies RogersNo concernsifthe development does not impact the existing Public Utility Easement. BellNo concerns as long as a Right of Way remains for utility requirements. Saint John Energy No comments. Liberty UtilitiesNo concerns. Enbridge/Emera No comments. Conditions Staff has recommended that any approval to reconstruct the building or the requested variances be subject to conditions. These conditions will establish requirements associated with site development and operations including parking, landscaping, screening, site access and permitting. Conclusion The proposed application involves a use which does not conform with the requirements of the Zoning By-Law. Staff are unable to verify the non-conforming status of this use. Non- Community Planning Act, which permits their continuance. Over time, non-conforming uses often relocate, are formalized through a rezoning process, or ultimately cease operation once the buildings are at the end of their lifespan. The approval of the reconstruction of the Vehicle Repair Garage will extend the lifespan of this use into the future. If considering approval, PAC should consider the addition of conditions to support site upgrades and to reduce the impact to the surrounding properties. ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS a)Denial of both the reconstruction and variances. b)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances with conditions. c)Approval of the reconstruction and/or variances without conditions. d) e)Send the application to Common Council for consideration. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Better Steering and Automotive Inc. 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Page 16 of 16 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT sent to landowners within 100 metres of the subject property on July 27, 2026. Letters were sent to 58 properties. As of the date of this report, 30 letters and 1 petition were received regarding this application. 18 letters and a petition were submitted in opposition to the proposal. 5 letters were received in support and an additional 7 letters indicated support of the development subject to conditions. STAFF CONTACT Name: Jennifer Kirchner, RPP, MCIP, Senior Planner Email: jennifer.kirchner@saintohn.ca Phone: 506-639-7933 APPENDICES Map 1: Aerial Photography Map 2: Future Land Use Map 3: Zoning Attachment 1: Site Photography Submission 1: Site Plan and Renderings c: Amy Poffenroth, P. Eng., MBA, Commissioner, Growth & Community Services Pankaj Nalavde, RPP, MCIP, Director of Community Planning & Housing Bill Mackey, MCIP, AICP, Manager of Community Planning P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 SAINTJOHN.CA Buubdinfou!2;!Tjuf!QipuphsbqizNdMbvhimjo!Dsftdfou!Gspoubhf!dpoubjojoh!uif!Wfijdmf!Sfqbjs!Hbsbhf!boe!uif!Exfmmjoh!VojuQbsljoh!Mpu!boe!Sfbs!Zbse!Mboetdbqjoh Joufstfdujpo!pg!NdMbvhimjo!Dsftdfou!boe!Cbscbsb!DsftdfouUif!Cbscbsb!Dsftdfou!Gmbolbhf!Zbse From:Marilyn To:OneStop Subject:4 and 6 McLaughlin Crescent (PID: 55246789) Date:August 11, 2026 9:39:13 PM You don't often get email from aliantbabe@yahoo.ca. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** PAC Meeting: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 My address: 3 McLaughlin Crescent I support the proposed development if the following concerns are addressed & upheld: - visual - all equipment, furniture, car parts, tires, garbage, etc., are not stored or laying around within sight from the street. This would decrease value of residents properties & is unsightly. - parking on street - most of the day employees and/or customers vehicles are parked on both sides of the street. This impedes emergency vehicles from going up or down McLaughlin Crescent.This also makes getting out of driveways very dangerous, as it's a blind hill & residents can't see any traffic coming because parked vehicles are blocking view. The parking lot should have a maximum number of vehicles at one time, which also includes daily incoming vehicles. The parking lot is full of vehicles at night, with salvaged vehicles & vehicles that have been there for a long time. This leaves no room for incoming vehicles to park on lot. - salvage cars - these are being rebuilt or fixed up or used for parts. I don't want it to become an auto salvage yard. They are now stored within sight of the street. - business hours be kept & not loud machinery being heard until late evening. All of the above concerns directly impact me, as I own the house across the street from the garage. Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer From:Shaun Abbott To:OneStop Subject:Restoration at 6 and 4 Mclaughlin Date:August 11, 2026 2:55:58 PM You don't often get email from abbottshaun78@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** To whom it may concern, I Shaun Abbott Resident at 25 Barbara Crescent, Saint John. I am one of the residents close to the proposed restoration at 4 and 6 McLaughlin. Let the owners restore the property. I have also been a letter carrier in this area for the past 20 years. The previous owner Phillip Bettle. He was a great mechanic but he let the property deteriorate. The current owner has been fixing up the area. All the Japanese Knotwood growing everywhere was removed. The shingles that blew everywhere were dealt with when they replaced the roof. Before these fine folks took over there were cars everywhere on the street. They cleared the side lot and moved the bulk of the traffic snarl onto their own property. They have painted and repaired the main building. They have a public bathroom that useable now. For all that's good and holy let them continue restoring this garage. From:landerson7242@gmail.com To:OneStop Cc:landerson7242@gmail.com;blakeanderson1964@gmail.com Subject:4&6 MCLAUGHLIN CRES. PID 55246789 Date:August 10, 2026 8:29:30 PM You don't often get email from landerson7242@gmail.com. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** Project description: RESTART OF BUILDING CONTAINING NON CONFORMING USE 1. Do you support the proposed development? No. I strongly oppose the proposed development and the conversion of these properties. 2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development? My main concerns are traffic safety, the significant change and expansion of the business, and the impact on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property has been used for approximately 18 years as a small, one-bay, one-person specialized alignment business. The property was purchased by the current owners a few years ago, and the operation now being proposed is significantly different in both its nature and scale. I am concerned about the potential for a much larger auto-body operation, including vehicle dismantling, to result in significantly more vehicles, parts and materials being stored improperly on the property. I do not want our residential neighbourhood to become surrounded by a large accumulation of vehicles and vehicle parts. 3. How does the proposed development directly impact you? As a nearby resident, this development would directly affect my safety, the amount of traffic in the area, and the character of my neighbourhood. An auto repair facility/chop shop would bring increased vehicle traffic and activity into an area that is currently residential. The proposed access points also raise concerns about additional traffic moving through the surrounding residential streets. I am also very concerned about vehicles being parked along the roadway, particularly on the blind hill. I have personally come close to being hit on approximately three occasions. Increasing the size and activity of the business could make this safety concern considerably worse. 4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal? I do not have recommendations for changes that would make me support this proposal. I believe the application should be denied. I am also requesting clarification regarding the proposed access/driveway shown on the plan, including how it will be used and how the additional traffic ans fluids will be managed. 5. Would you support the development as proposed? No. I strongly oppose the development as proposed. The small, one-bay specialized alignment business that operated at this location for many years is very different from the larger auto- body and chop shop now being proposed. I do not believe this significant change in the nature and scale of the business is appropriate for this residential neighbourhood. 6. Would you support the development with some changes? No. I would not support the development with changes. My concerns are with the proposed use of the property itself, the increased traffic, increased mishandling of toxic fluids and the impact this development would have on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. Kindest regards, Leanne & Blake Anderson #20 McLaughlin crescent Saint John NB E2J 2K2 Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form Project Location:4 and 6 McLaughlin Crescent (PID: 55246789) Project Description:Restoration of building containing non-conforming use PAC Meeting: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 Public Hearing: Your Name: David Arseneau & Tyler Arseneau Your Address: 32 McLaughlin Crescent 1.Do you support the proposed development? No, not with the lack of information provided; need more info on the proposed layout for one and accessibility to the site from the road. Recent observations of the site looks like its turning into a junk yard with numerous wrecked vehicles in the yard now. Additionallydue to the fact that the location is in a residential and not industrial area, this brings further concerns of noise and traffic. 2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development? No information on the layout and parking, to control the access parking on the street which has been noted on both sides of the street which makes it extremely dangerousfor traffic flow and children come and going to school. 3. How does the proposed development directly impact you? We have been given no details on the proposal nor have we been permitted to obtain it. However, the new management has already proven to be an issue with the amount of debris, cars,noise, and accessibility. Cars are often parked or worked on in such a way that emergency vehicles would be unable to pass, and would have to go around another way. With McLean road having been blocked off, that already leaves McLaughlin and Barbara crescent with less routes of egress. Additional construction and a larger building for the auto shop is a concern for this reason, even without having access to the plans. 4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal? Being more open with what they plan to do with the limited space in a residential area. 5. Would you support the developments proposed? No 6. Would you support the development with some changes? I would require more information before, and if they do not wish to comply than I'd so No. From:Asmar Khan To:OneStop Subject:4 and 6 McLaughlin Cres PID 55246789 Date:August 11, 2026 3:26:43 PM You don't often get email from asmarkhan202538@gmail.com. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** Asmar Khan 11 Barbara Crescent, Saint John, NB E2J2K6 1) Yes, I do support the proposed deveoplment 2)I have no concerns, there has been a workshop there for the last 20+ years. 3) I have no recommendations, the deveoplment should proceed as proposed. 4)Yes, I would support the deveoplment as proposed. 5) Yes, I would support it. From:Mandy Malashevsky To:OneStop Subject:Comment for application of 4-6 McLaughlin crescent PID 55246789 Date:August 11, 2026 10:06:46 PM \[You don't often get email from mmalashevsky111@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification \] \[ External Email Alert\] **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.** Good evening, This is to comment on the application for 4-6 McLaughlin crescent PID 55246789. First we were not properly informed about this application or the ability to comment on it. As we live in the neighbourhood and are impacted by the business in question, we should have been informed properly and at the same time as other residences have been; the fact that we were not is in bad faith. 1. We do not support the development of the property at all. The business is not run with respect to the neighborhood, environment, or with the safety of residents in mind. It is a messy chaotic property and is too small for how they are trying to run their business. It is always in poor condition, appears to be a fire hazard at all times, and is trying to exploit the entire neighbourhood for use in their business plan. Further developments of this property would not improve this. 2. The top two concerns include safety and accessibility of our neighbourhood . Safety: Many times cars are whipping in and out of the parking lot of the business very quickly, without proper visibility due to the sheer volume of vehicles parked in the parking lot, all the way to the curb. We have almost been hit repeatedly either walking the dogs or even in our vehicles coming in and leaving the neighborhood due to this Behaviour. The fact that McLaughlin is usually down to only one lane due to the business parking their cars on the street, and working on the cars on the street, enhances the safety issues. The entire neighborhood is negatively impacted by how this business is run, and how it uses our roads. Multiple times daily many cars are test driven around Barbara and Carl court at a high rate of speed with no regard for residents safety. Accessibility: Many times we have been delayed, restricted, or completely blocked from entering our neighborhood due to multiple cars parked on both sides of the street belonging to, or in the care of the business. We have witnessed tow trucks blocking and taking up the entire roadway while delivering cars because the business parking lot is too full and congested for proper delivery. The business also parks cars on the corner and around the corner to Barbara crescent, so performing a right turn onto Barbara is most times impossible, and makes potential accidents more likely. Accessibility is also restricted by the fact that workers can sometimes be on the road doing work to the vehicles, which can limit the ability of any cars passing the business safely. 3. The proposed development directly impacts us. Our safety is always impacted since walking the dogs can be unsafe when the cars are test driven at high speeds throughout the neighbourhood. Safety is also impacted because emergency vehicles can be delayed or blocked from access to us in a timely manner. We are also directly impacted due to the Environmental and health impact of a badly run business with too many cars in various states of disrepair for extended periods of time. More vehicles pose more chemical issues. Many times we have seen very large piles of tires, improperly stored chemicals, and what appeared to be oil stains on the ground. If the current state of the business shows potential chemical hazards the safety of every single resident of our neighbourhood is in jeopardy at all times, especially if there is a fire. 4. Recommendations for improving the proposal: My suggestion is that the business be shut down and inspected for environmental damage and refined for residential property. The space is simply too small for a properly run automotive business to be run. They cannot handle their current level of vehicles properly, therefore any future development would just increase the problems. 5. We would NOT support the development as proposed. 6. We would NOT support the development with some changes. Thank you for your time, Mandy and Michael Rackley 4 Carl Court, Saint John NB (506) 636-0587 & (506)-721-6030 MRackley2023@gmail.com Have a Great day! Planning Advisory Committee Comment Form Project Location: 4&6 McLaughlin Crescent (PID 55246789) Project Description: Restoration of building containing non-conforming use. th PAC Meeting: Tuesday August 18, 2026 Danielle McPherson & Matthew Ritchie Address: 6 Barbara Crescent, Saint John, New Brunswick 1.Do you support the proposed development? Although we would love to see the property cleaned up andimproved upon. We are having a tough time supporting this project as the demolitionof the previousbuilding led to weeks of construction going sometimes as late as midnight. Our children were awoken by machinery, loud voices and tools late into the nightmultiple times, resulting in having to call the shop to make them stop, going outside and asking them to be quiet andcalling the non-emergency police line to make formal noise complaints. This was not a problem that we ever faced when it was owned by the previous owner.We would like this development to come with strict guidelines/enforceable rules that will not disrupt our lives. Even after the building has been torn down, we have been woken up after midnight with what sounded like a compressor as recently as the evening thth of August 8into the early hours of the morning of August 9, and again th now as I type this letter on August 10at 9pm. We love and support the idea of added greenery, and a capped number of parking spots on the property, as long asthat is the strict number of cars allowed on the property going forward. As of right now there appears to be at least double that parked in and around the property at any given time. Driving up McLaughlin and onto Barbara during the day, most days, results in having to slalom between cars parked all over the street.Some days the passage is just large enough for a passenger vehicle and emergency services would have been blocked from accessing Barbara Crescent and McLaughlin if required. If the development would prevent that from happening, we are more on board. 2.What are your top 2 or 3 concerns about the proposed development? Our top twoconcerns are noise, operation hours/construction hoursand overall operation of the property. a) Noise The business already seems to have little regard for the neighbours around them, and we are concerned that this new project will result in no sleep for us and our children because they could be working late into the night, for weeks at a time. We previously used to joke that we would not even know there was business next door, but since the new ownership, that has changed. On topof their untimely constructionhours they often park loud running trucks on the property between the hours of 4am and 6am andplow the lot with an ATV or 4-Wheeler during the winter with an extremely loud engine.We hope this project will streamline all their processes and make a positive difference instead of exasperatingan already inconvenientone. b) Operation Hours/Construction Hours/Overall OperationWe are also concerned about business hours going forward and what that will mean operate on a 9-5 schedule, butwe hope they take being in a residential neighbourhood into consideration going forward. If this project moves forward, we hope that the city will enforce noise by-laws and give them guidelines on appropriate times to work on this project so as not todisturb the neighbourhood around them.We also notice that their garbage piles around the property grow very large and occasionallyencroach onto our property, making it our job to clean up part of their mess. Additionally, several evenings in August a strong gasoline odor was present emanating fromtheir property.We hope this new development will result in more frequent disposal of garbage, and a better system of where they keep it. 3.How does the proposed development directly impact you? They are the property directly adjacent to us, making us the most impacted by proximity. We get the brunt of all the noise and garbage as our properties are connected. 4.What are your recommendations for improving the proposal? More dumpster spaces on the property, with a strict plan of how they plan to dispose of different materials, especially hazardous waste. Enforceable guidelines of when construction can be completed, and business hours. A strict maximum of only 15 cars on the lot, as depicted in the plan that is monitored by the city going forward to keep cars off the roads surrounding the area and grass. If they are paving the lot, we would be very interested in making sure they are installing proper drainage systems so our property is not affected by any water build-up on their property. Their plan to keep the cedar hedge and add lower shrubbery to the green space bordering our two properties, will require excessive removal and remediationof soilon both of our propertiesas that section along our shared property line isovergrown with Japaneseknotweed. It is a restricted and prohibited species of weed and will overtake anyplanned greenspace if not successfully cleaned up. 5.Would you support the development as proposed? While we like aspects of the proposed development, we hope that there will be strict stipulations of how it is carried out and then used going forward. But overall, a clean-up of the property would be greatly received. 6.Would you support the development with some changes? As long as it is carried out professionally, within reasonable business hours and all proper measures are taken to not affect the surrounding properties, we would support it.Although extra greenspace is an overall positive for the neighbourhood, we would request that one particular tree that borders our two properties be professionally trimmed to allow our power line to be unobstructed and free of debris. As we have already had to replace the attachment point to our house due to high winds shifting the tree branches which resulted in the anchor point being ripped from the structure.We would also only support this if going forward they were more mindful of their noise, garbage, and hours ofoperation. From:Manvir Singh To:OneStop Subject:Regarding 4&6 Mclaughlin Crescent/PID 55246789 Date:August 11, 2026 2:18:54 PM \[ External Email Alert\]**Please note that this message is from an external sender. If it appears to be sent from a Saint John employee, please forward the email to spamsample@saintjohn.ca or contact the IT Service Desk.** Hello, I have Attached my comments . Manvir singh 14 barbara Crescent, Saint John, NB E2J 2K7, Canada From:OneStop To:Kirchner, Jennifer Cc:OneStop Subject:FW: Application change 4&6 Mclaughlin Cresc, Saint John NB Date:August 4, 2026 8:54:19 AM Please see the comments below for your file. Candice Rideout, BSc Administrative Assistant/Adjointe Administrative One Stop Development Shop / Guichet unique pour l’aménagement City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Office / Bureau: (506) 658-4067 Website|Facebook| Shape Your City|Instagram -----Original Message----- From: sylvain cyr <jedi_linux@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 9:43 PM To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Subject: Application change 4&6 Mclaughlin Cresc, Saint John NB \[You don't often get email from jedi_linux@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification \] \[ External Email Alert\] **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.** 1)Do you support the proposed Development? YES, but with minor modifications and few concerns, see number 2 2)What are your top 5 concerns about the proposed development a) Traffic control IN/Out of business on Mclaughlin Crescent. It is suggested that the new garage would be build at the very upper Left corner of the lot to give more parking space for client. It is suggested 3 entry to the business. One entry opening on Barbara Cresc, Keep the current one opening on Mclaughlin Cresc, and create a lane or private driveway opening on Westmorland Road by using the empty lot. It is suggested to have a hiding wiring fence to hide the property content has a lot of junk around the garage, from pile of old tires, old parts b) The main concern is not the garage, but the heavy in/out traffic since its opening. Having a lane extra on westmorland rd or at least a private driveway would help. This would help the whole neighborhood . 3)How the proposed development directly impact you? The garage is not the issue, only the traffic, and keep clean around the property. 4) What recommendations for improving the proposal? During the construction and landscaping , the garage would be closed. You cannot have contractors, it's employee, plus the client at the same time. The contractor employees would have to park further down Barbara Cresc. 5)Would you support the development as proposed? Yes, with modification of access to the property. High traffic around the business is an issue 6) Would you support with some changes? Yes Sylvain Cyr 35 Barbara Cres Saint John NB E2J 2K8 xbzof!wpvupvs 52!cbscbsb!dsftdfou Opu!gspn!xibu!j!tff!upebz 2/2!fyqboejoh!uijt!uzqf!pg!cvtjoftt-!xijdi!bu!uijt!ujnf!bmsfbez!mpplt!mjlf!b!#dipq!tipq#-!{pofe!gps!b!pof!cbz!hbsbhf!)ejmbqjube!cvjmejoh!pvucbdl!jt!gps!tupsbhf!pomz!boe!ibt!cffo!gps!uif!2:!zfbst!xf!i bwf!mjwfe!ifsf!voujm!ju!xbt!upsoepxo*!!!tipvme!opu!cf!jo!b!SFTJEFOUJBM!ofjhicpsippe/!3/!Xifo!Cfuumft!pxofe!uijt!cvtjoftt!ju!xbt!bmxbzt!lfqu!dmfbofe!vq!boe!qspgfttjpobm-!bu!uijt!ujnf!uif!gspou!boe!cbd l!mpplt!mjlf!b!kvol!zbse-/)ibwf!qipupt*4/!!Xf!bsf!fyusfnfmz!dpodfsofe!bcpvu!pvs!qspqfsuz!wbmvft/!Uijt!jt!tvdi!bo!fzf!tpsf!boe!ibt!cffo!tjodf!pqfojoh!voefs!uif!ofx!obnf/ 32/!jnqbdu!po!qbsljoh!boe!gmpx!pg!usbggjd!jo!boe!pvu!pg!NdMbvhimjo!Tusffu/!xifo!uifz!dbou!gju!bmm!uif!dbst!jo-!lffq!jo!njoe!uijt!jt!tvqqptfe!up!cf!b!POF!DBS!CBZ!!uifz!qbsl!uifn!po!cpui!tjeft!pg!uif!t usffu!xijdi!jt!bmsfbez!obsspx-!3/!qspqfsuz!wbmvft!xjmm!tvggfs4/!tbgfuz!pg!fwfszpof!boe!ftqfdjbmmz!xifo!uifz!uftu!esjwf!uif!dbst!vq!boe!epxo!b!sftjefoujbm!dsftdfou/!Uijt!xbt!ofwfs!epof!xjui!uif!qsfwjp vt!pxofs-!zpv!ibsemz!lofx!uifz!xfsf!uifsf/! Uijt!uzqf!pg!cvtjoftt!tipvme!cf!jo!b!dpnnfsdjbm!{pof!ps!uif!joevtusjbm!qbsl! xf!bsf!vodmfbs!pg!uif!gvmm!qspqptbm/!xjuipvu!b!wjtvbm!!bne!b!gbs!dmfbsfs!qjduvsf!jo!qmbdf!j!xpvme!ibwf!up!tbz!Op Op!ju!tipvme!opu!cf!jo!b!sftjefoujbm!bsfb/ xbzofwpvupvs 52cbscbsbdsftdfou Opugspnxibujtffupebz 2/2fyqboejohuijtuzqfpgcvtjoftt-xijdibuuijtujnfbmsfbezmppltmjlfb#dipqtipq#- 32/jnqbdupoqbsljohboegmpxpgusbggjdjoboepvupgNdMbvhimjoTusffu/xifouifz Uijtuzqfpgcvtjoftttipvmecfjobdpnnfsdjbm{pofpsuifjoevtusjbmqbsl xfbsfvodmfbspguifgvmmqspqptbm/xjuipvubwjtvbmbnebgbsdmfbsfsqjduvsfjoqmbdf Opjutipvmeopucfjobsftjefoujbmbsfb/ From:Kirchner, Jennifer To:Rideout.City, Candice; O"Connor, Colleen Cc:Mackey, Bill; Mattson, Yeva Subject:FW: 4&6 MCLAUGHLIN CRES. PID 55246789 Date:September 14, 2026 11:40:12 AM Attachments:image002.png image004.png Mailout - Comment Form_English_3.pdf Can you provide the additional letters to PAC for consideration. One is the body of this email. The second is the attachment. Jennifer Kirchner, RPP, MCIP Senior Planner / Urbaniste Principal Growth & Community Services / Services de la croissance et du développement communautaire City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Cell / Cellulaire: (506) 639-7933 Website|Facebook|Twitter|Instagram From: Mattson, Yeva <Yeva.Mattson@saintjohn.ca> Sent: September 10, 2026 10:12 AM To: Kirchner, Jennifer <jennifer.kirchner@saintjohn.ca> Subject: FW: 4&6 MCLAUGHLIN CRES. PID 55246789 Yeva Mattson, RPP, MCIP Planner / Urbaniste Community Planning / Service D’Urbanisme Growth and Community Services / Service de la croissance et de la communauté City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Cell / Cellulaire: (506) 721-8453 Website|Facebook|Shape Your City|Instagram From: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Sent: September 10, 2026 9:22 AM To: Mattson, Yeva <Yeva.Mattson@saintjohn.ca> Subject: FW: 4&6 MCLAUGHLIN CRES. PID 55246789 Colleen O’Connor, BA, BBA Administrative Assistant /Adjointe Administrative Development and Community Services / Développement et services communautaires City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Office / Bureau: (506) 658-4067 Website|Facebook| Shape Your City|Instagram My flexible workweek is Monday – Thursday. From:landerson7242@gmail.com <landerson7242@gmail.com> Sent: September 10, 2026 8:13 AM To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Subject: Fw: 4&6 MCLAUGHLIN CRES. PID 55246789 You don't often get email from landerson7242@gmail.com. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** Morning, I just received a notification that there's another meeting on Tuesday September 15. I received this notification from my neighbor NOT from anyone at the PAC because ridiculously, you guys only inform people within a 100m of a business, so you informed all the wrong people about this stuff. However , my information and my comments below still stand and I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS. I have, driven by every single day because that's where I live. And I do want you to know they are working after hours , even since the last meeting. They're pretty sneaky , but they closed all their doors , they leave their lights on and they work inside. You can hear the air drops going. They're also still working off jacks in their yard. If you guys let this go through, know I will be calling inspectors, fire departments, and whoever else I need to every single day because of the hazard that these guys cause in this area. All this and they haven't even added the extension. Thank you Leanne Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 8:29 p.m., landerson7242@gmail.com <landerson7242@gmail.com> wrote: Project description: RESTART OF BUILDING CONTAINING NON CONFORMING USE 1. Do you support the proposed development? No. I strongly oppose the proposed development and the conversion of these properties. 2. What are your top two or three concerns about the proposed development? My main concerns are traffic safety, the significant change and expansion of the business, and the impact on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property has been used for approximately 18 years as a small, one-bay, one- person specialized alignment business. The property was purchased by the current owners a few years ago, and the operation now being proposed is significantly different in both its nature and scale. I am concerned about the potential for a much larger auto-body operation, including vehicle dismantling, to result in significantly more vehicles, parts and materials being stored improperly on the property. I do not want our residential neighbourhood to become surrounded by a large accumulation of vehicles and vehicle parts. 3. How does the proposed development directly impact you? As a nearby resident, this development would directly affect my safety, the amount of traffic in the area, and the character of my neighbourhood. An auto repair facility/chop shop would bring increased vehicle traffic and activity into an area that is currently residential. The proposed access points also raise concerns about additional traffic moving through the surrounding residential streets. I am also very concerned about vehicles being parked along the roadway, particularly on the blind hill. I have personally come close to being hit on approximately three occasions. Increasing the size and activity of the business could make this safety concern considerably worse. 4. What are your recommendations for improving the proposal? I do not have recommendations for changes that would make me support this proposal. I believe the application should be denied. I am also requesting clarification regarding the proposed access/driveway shown on the plan, including how it will be used and how the additional traffic ans fluids will be managed. 5. Would you support the development as proposed? No. I strongly oppose the development as proposed. The small, one-bay specialized alignment business that operated at this location for many years is very different from the larger auto-body and chop shop now being proposed. I do not believe this significant change in the nature and scale of the business is appropriate for this residential neighbourhood. 6. Would you support the development with some changes? No. I would not support the development with changes. My concerns are with the proposed use of the property itself, the increased traffic, increased mishandling of toxic fluids and the impact this development would have on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. Kindest regards, Leanne & Blake Anderson #20 McLaughlin crescent Saint John NB E2J 2K2 From:OneStop To:Mattson, Yeva; Kirchner, Jennifer Subject:FW: URGENT: Public Input Opposition for PAC Meeting Tonight – 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent Date:September 15, 2026 10:41:00 AM Attachments:image002.png I will print this off to hand out at the pre meeting this evening. Colleen O’Connor, BA, BBA Administrative Assistant /Adjointe Administrative Development and Community Services / Développement et services communautaires City of Saint John / La Ville de Saint John Office / Bureau: (506) 658-4067 Website|Facebook| Shape Your City|Instagram My flexible workweek is Monday – Thursday. From: joanne connell <joanne_conn@yahoo.ca> Sent: September 15, 2026 10:35 AM To: OneStop <onestop@saintjohn.ca> Cc: Common Clerk <commonclerk@saintjohn.ca> Subject: URGENT: Public Input Opposition for PAC Meeting Tonight – 4-6 McLaughlin Crescent You don't often get email from joanne_conn@yahoo.ca. Learn why this is important \[ External Email Alert\]**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.** Date:Sept 14 2026 To:Office of the Common Clerk, City of Saint John Members of Saint John Common Council & The Planning Advisory Committee 15 Market Square, Saint John, NB E2L 1E8 RE: Strong Opposition to Commercial Expansion Application – \[Insert Garage Name or Street Address\] (Hearing Date: September 21) To the Common Clerk and Members of Council, I am writing as a local homeowner and resident, of the McLaughlin and Barbara Crescent neighborhood, to formally register my strong objection to the proposed three-bay expansion, parking lot extension, and zoning changes requested by the automotive garage located at 6 Mclaughlin Crescent. I would like to start by saying that I truly believe our neighborhood fully supports economic growth and welcoming new business owners to Saint John. That being said, community development must never come at the expense of public safety, environmental regulations, and municipal law. True "good faith" business investment is practiced by those who respect city bylaws and their neighbors. It appears the operators of this garage have proven they have not abided by this at all. Our specific objections and concerns include: Demonstrated Disregard for Municipal By-Laws & Unpermitted Demolition and Public Safety Risks: As exposed during the August 18 municipal meeting, this operator deliberately demolished a building on their property in the dark of the night without obtaining a mandatory City Demolition Permit, AND with lack of concern of their neighbors and the environmental risks. The structure that was "demolished" was of an age that it could and most probably was constructed or housed any number of less than safe materials (asbestos, oils, chemicals etc). A business that intentionally bypasses building inspectors and city oversight, something that all homeowners and businesses must adhere to cannot be counted on to self-regulate a significantly larger, three-bay commercial operation. Historical Use, Current Zoning and Intensification: This garage was constructed in approximately the 1950s-1960s, when municipal planning standards, zoning requirements and expectations surrounding small home- based operations were very different. A small, one-bay operation may have been permitted or tolerated at that time. However, the fact that a limited use may have existed historically should not automatically justify a major expansion of that use today, particularly in a neighbourhood that is not commercially zoned. The proposed change from a small one-bay operation to a three-bay commercial facility represents a significant intensification of the property. We question how an operation of this size and nature can be considered appropriate in its present location under today's zoning and planning standards. Approval should be based on the proposed use and its impact on the surrounding residential neighbourhood today, not simply on the fact that some form of garage operation has existed on the property for many years. Noise and Neighbourhood Impact: A three-bay operation would also substantially increase commercial noise and activity. Multiple vehicles being serviced at the same time, along with compressors, pneumatic/air tools, machinery, vehicle movement and other shop equipment, would create a very different level of noise than a small one-bay operation. This increased activity would directly affect neighbouring residential properties and the reasonable enjoyment of their homes and yards. Neighbourhood and Child Safety: Our greatest concerns is the safety of the neighbourhood, particularly the safety of children who live and play in this residential area. It is important to point out that not very long ago McLaughlin Crescent speed limit was reduced to 40K/hr and this was done because it is a residential area, it has many children and seniors. Vehicles being repaired at the garage are regularly test-driven up and down the residential street. We have observed vehicles being driven while a door is open and while the driver appears to be looking downward or concentrating on listening for mechanical noises. Regardless of the reason for doing so, this creates an obvious concern when vehicles are being tested on a residential street where children, pedestrians and residents are present. Expanding the operation from one bay to three would reasonably be expected to increase the number of vehicles entering and leaving the property and being test- driven through the neighbourhood. This is not simply a question of inconvenience or additional traffic; it is a public-safety concern. We believe the suitability of conducting this level of automotive activity in a residential neighbourhood, and the potential increased risk to children and other residents, should be given significant consideration before any expansion is approved. Environmental and Safety Risks: Expanding from a one-bay to a three-bay facility would also significantly increase the volume of automotive fluids, chemicals, hazardous materials and waste being handled and stored on the property. This raises legitimate concerns regarding containment, drainage, spill prevention, hazardous-waste disposal, fire safety, fencing, buffering and protection of neighbouring properties. Given the owner's previous history of proceeding with work without first obtaining required approvals, we are particularly concerned about whether all environmental, safety, permitting and site requirements would be consistently followed, we are not convinced they would be. A Final note: I would also respectively point you back to the comments that myself and my neighbors made at the first meeting in August, referencing the condition of the front and back areas (everyone has pictures) and the dangerous materials left just "out and about", including an acetylene torch left OPEN & RUNNING after everyone had left the site for the day, Since that meeting they have "tidied" up the front area (side and back still look the same-in a horrible state) and it is not lost on us that the timing is suspect...it was only minimally cleaned up and ONLY after that first meeting. A two week clean up does not eradicate the months/year of it looking like an industrial junk yard. We respectfully implore Council and the Planning Advisory Committee to DENY this application entirely. This business at the proposed increased size and workforce should be in a commercially zoned area. Saint John should not reward development undertaken without the required permits or approvals by subsequently allowing it to be legitimized under the guise of business growth. Doing so risks undermining the very permitting, planning and enforcement processes that are intended to protect residential neighbourhoods and the people who live in them.Thank you for your time and your dedication to protecting Saint John's family residential neighborhoods. Sincerely, Mr & Mrs Wayne Voutour 41 Barbara Crescent Saint John NB E2J 2K8 28 13 16 18 11 15 3 13 27 16 2 4 4§ ª ¸®´ȁ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ........................................................................................... ................................................................................. ............................................................................. Chapter 2STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS ......................................................................................................... .............................................................. .............................................................................. ...................................................... ................................................................................ ..................................................................................................... Chapter 3LEGAL FOUNDATION ..................................................................................................... ............................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................... ......................................................... ............................................................................. ........................ ..................................................................................................... Chapter 4QUASI-JUDICIAL REVIEWS OF POLICE GOVERNANCE ..................................................................................................... ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ............................................................................................ .......................................................................................... ......................................................................................... ...................................................................... ..................................................................................................... Chapter 5ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN ..................................................................................................... ......................................................................................... .................................................................................... ................................................ ........................................................ ........................................................ ............................................................. .......................... ............................ ....................... ..................... ........................................................ ............................................... ................................................................... Chapter 6BEST PRACTICES ..................................................................................................... ................................................................................ ...................................... ................................................................................ ............................................................................................. ....................................................................................................... .............................................................................................. ........................................................................................................... ................................................................................................. ..................................................................................................... Chapter 7COMPARISON OF OPTIONS ............................................... .................. ....................................................... ......................................... ............................................... .................................................................................. .............................................................................. ............................................................................................ ........................................................ ...................................................................................................... Chapter 8 RECOMMENDATIONS Chapter 9 IMPLEMENTATION 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 30 31 32 33 33 34 35 36 34 35 36 37 37 38 39 38 39 40 41 40 41 42 43 42 43 44 45 44 45 Retired RCMP Assistant Commissioner Cal Corley attributes the common misunderstanding regarding police operational independence to an overinterpretation of operational independence to specific tactical decisions i.e., whether and whom to 46 investigate, prosecute, or arrest. It is critically important to strike the right balance between police governance and police operational importance While governments generally through police boards decide important policy issues about policing, they must refrain from providing direction to the 47 This prohibition, therefore, doesnotprevent the police governing authority, through its policies, priorities and objectives, from providing direction to the police service regarding police capabilities, conditions, considerations, reporting and verification surrounding the general application of its services to everyone in the community. 46 47 Morden et al insist that the police governing authority has an obligation to do just that. 48 49 50 48 49 50 51 51 52 52 53 53 54 54 Significance (Critical Points), Armoured Rescue Vehicle, Policing Encampmentsand Use of Force 55 55 56 57 56 57 Ontario has recently established an Inspector General to oversee policing and police 58 governance. The Inspector Generalduties regarding police service boards areto: 58 59 The required level of adequate capacity and readiness is a judgement call of the local police is it reasonable given the circumstances consider in determining whether a specific policing function is adequate, given quantitative 60 and qualitative information, include: 59 60 the policing needs of the community; the geographic and socio- policing responsibility; the extent and manner in which the policing function is effectively provided in similar communities; the extent to which past provision of the policing function by the police service has been effective in addressing the policing needs of the community; and best practices regardingthe policing function. It follows that the police governance authority must proactively: 61 create sufficient capacity in each of the prescribed policing functionseither in- house or through assistance agreements with other police services/forces; provide for readiness: appropriate training, supervision and availability; provide appropriate governance direction that sufficiently articulates their own interpretation of community needs, values and expectations; verify that intended policing functions in fact exist, are appropriately implemented, and result in acceptable consequences; and make adjustments as appropriate. In applying these requirements to the General Good Governance Responsibilities identified in Chapter 5, the police governance authority should undertake a perpetual cycle of providing and sustaining adequate policing as depicted below: 61 62 62 the provincial standard for the policing function; the policing needs, values and expectationsof the community; the geographic and socio-demographic characteristics of the City of Saint John; the extent and manner in which the policing function is effectively provided in similar communities; the extent to which past provision of the policing function by the police service has been effective in addressing the policing needs of the community; and best practices regardingthe policing function. SAINT JOHN POLICE COMMISSIONERS COMPETENCY-BASED SELECTION PROCESS Recruiting& Selection Process Activity 13-6 months before anexpected vacancy on the Police Commission, the Clerk publicly advertises the appointment opportunity, referencing the new Commission role, the publicly available Commission Mandate and the Commission webpage, as well asthe requirements to provide a resumé, secure a Criminal Background Check,and participate in a Behavioural Event Interview. 2HR screens the applications and resumés and arranges interviews for eligible candidates(i.e. at least 18 years of age, resident of Saint John, proficient in the governinglanguage(s), available to attend meetings). 3The Clerk arranges for Candidates to undergo a Level 1 Criminal Background Check.Results are added to the applications. The Clerk forwards the applications to the Behavioural Event Interviewer an HR professional in- house or third-party contractor. 4Behavioural Event Interviewer conducts a BehaviouralEvent Interviewof each candidateregarding the 16 competencies contained in the CompetencyProfile(included in this report),and completes the Competency Profile Scoring Matrix (also included in this report). 5The BehaviouralEvent Interviewer gives eachCompetency Profile Matrixan alphabetic identifier(e.g. A, B, C, D, etc.). The same identifier is given the s Criminal Background Check.These alphabetic identifiers now replace namesin the SelectionProcess, thereby assuring selection objectivity and candidate privacy. Eachalphabetically-labelled Competency Profile Scoring Matrix and accompanyingCriminal BackgroundCheck is forwarded to the Nominating Committee. 1/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ 6The NominatingCommittee considers the Competency Profile and Criminal Background Result of each anonymous candidate, along with any specific Competency needs identified by the Police Commissionand/or the Chief of Public Safety(who attends Police Commission meetings), and selects its nomination(s)by alphabetical identifier. In this manner candidates areselected based solelyon theirability to performthe duties of a Police Commissioner, as objectively assessed. NominatingCommittee discretion lies in how it weights each Competencies when makingin itscollective decisionhence the input of the Police Commission and Chief of Public Safety. 7Afterthe NominatingCommittee has reachedits decision, the recommended nominee(s)is identified by name (by the Behavioural Event Interviewer)for the purpose of the Nominating Council. 8Council considers the NominatingCommittee report and appoints the new Police Commissioner(s). 9The new Police Commissioner(s) reportsto the Police Commission for on- boarding and training. 2/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ Police Duties Commission DutyCommissionerDuty D1 Determine Reviews and analyzes objectively sourced public safety information, community needs, including surveys, focus groups, public complaints, statistics, values & stakeholder perspectives and media coverage, identifies relevant expectations trends, concerns and differing viewpoints, and works collaboratively with others to translate the findings into practical community safety needs, priorities and expectations. D2 Create strategic Contributes to the development of policing and corporate direction administration policies by identifying intended outcomes, organizational implications and risks to be avoided. Works collaboratively to establish community-informed, results-based strategic objectives for the Police Force and identifies meaningful performance measures to assess progress and results. D3 Evaluatecorporate Contributes to comprehensive and objective evaluations of the Police performance Force and the Chief of Police by assessing performance against established objectives, expectations and measures, identifying strengths, gaps and opportunities for improvement, and supporting constructive, evidence-based recommendations to enhance organizational and leadership effectiveness. D4 Verify policing Contributes to the objective verification of adequate and effective adequacy &policing by reviewing relevant information, performance measures effectiveness and other evidence. Assesses policing services against established requirements and community needs and identifies areas requiring attention or follow-up. D5 Direct strategic Contributes to the identification and selection of appropriate corrective actions corrective actions in response to gaps in adequate and effective policing, supports clear communication of required actions, and monitors follow-through and results to determine whether identified concerns have been addressed. D6 Select Chief of Contributes to the selection of the Chief of Police by participating in a Police fair, objective and evidence-based selection process, assessing candidates against established requirements and considering their ability to provide effective leadership and advance the strategic priorities of the Police Force. 3/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ D7 Evaluate financial Reviews and assesses program-based budget submissions from the plans & Chief of Police, considers proposed expenditures in relation to dispositions strategic priorities and available resources, and monitors spending by strategic program and in aggregate to support sound financial oversight and accountability. D8 Determinefair Contributes to the development of reasonable bargaining mandates remuneration by considering organizational priorities, financial implications and agreements relevant employment considerations, monitors the progress of negotiations, and participates in the review and approval of collective agreements and executive contracts. D9 Contribute toan Contribute to an effective board meeting process which promotes effective &efficient effective and efficient decision-making based on clear, consistent and board meeting honest communication, effective judgment and reasoned debate. process Strive for consensus but also supports initiative and accepts opposition. When conflict arises, dealwith it justlyand fairlyin order to restore healthy relationships. Police Competencies Competency Group: Knowledge C1 Community Demonstrates an understanding of the community, Related duties: Knowledge including its composition, needs, values and expectations D1,D2,D4,D6 regarding public safety and policing, and recognizes the role of police within the broader human services sector. Applies this understanding when considering policing priorities, community safety needs and opportunities for collaboration with community partners. C2 Knowledge of Demonstrates knowledge of effective governance Related duties: Governance&principles, board structures and board processes. D2,D3,D4,D5, Oversight Understands the distinct roles and responsibilities of the D6,D9 Board and its Chief Executive Officer, maintains appropriate boundaries between police governance and policeoperationalindependence, and applies an oversight perspective focused on direction, performance, resultsandaccountability. Competency Group: Analytical & Technical Skills C3 Financial Reads, interprets and critically assesses financial Related duties: Acumen statements, budgets and financial reports. Understands D3,D5,D7,D8 4/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ program-based budgeting and applies financial information to assess resource requirements, spending priorities, financial performance and organizational sustainability. C4 Group Recognizes and challenges groupthink, assumptions and Related duties: Decision-decision-making biases, including unconscious bias, that D1,D2,D3,D4, Making Skills may influence Board deliberations. Considers alternative D5,D6,D7,D8,D9 perspectives, tests assumptions and encourages objective consideration of relevant information before reaching conclusions. C5 Process Makes decisions and seeks outcomes by consistent Related duties: Orientation application of a logical sequence of steps. D1,D2,D3,D4, D5,D6,D7,D8,D9 Competency Group: Thinking C6 Conceptual Thinks strategically systems-wide. Makes connections Related duties: Thinking Skills between separate issues, seespatterns, trendsandD1,D2,D4 relationships,and developsmental frameworks to explain and interpret information. C7 Independent Maintains own convictions despite undue influence, Related duties: Thinking Skills opposition or threat. Has the courage to speak truth to D3,D4,D5,D6, power when called for.D8,D9 C8 Open-Values diverse opinions and builds views and opinions Related duties: mindedness with knowledge gained from others. D1,D2,D4,D6,D9 Competency Group: Personal Style C9 Ambiguity Remains constructive when information is limited, Related duties: Tolerance outcomes are uncertain or consensus cannot be reached. D1D4,D6 Assesses available information, considers potential risks and consequences, and is prepared to make reasoned, risk-adjusted decisions that appropriately balance community safety needs, potential benefits and acceptable levels of risk. C10 Effective Applies common sense, measured reasoning, knowledge Related duties: Judgment and experience to come to a conclusion and/or decision. D1,D2,D3,D4, D5,D6,D7,D8,D9 C11 Integrity Demonstrates integrity and ethical decision-makingRelated duties: characteristics. Trustworthy and conscientious and can D1,D3,D4,D5,D9 5/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ be relied upon to act and speak with consistency and honesty. C12 Self-awareness Accurately assesses strengths and weaknesses of self and Related duties: of others and can manage them successfully. C1,D3,D4,D6,D9 C13 Bias to Learn Actively seeks opportunities to expand knowledge of Related duties: emerging approaches, practices and trends in police D1,D2,D3,D4,D9 governance. Remains open to innovation, new ideas and changes that may challenge established practices, and considers their potential application to effective governance and oversight. Competency Group: Teamship C14 Orientation to Ensures conflict is resolved with evidence-based justice Related duties: Resolve and fairness in order tomaintain and/or restore healthy D3,D4,D Conflict relationships while fulfilling the police governance role. C15 Communication Asks questions and shares own perspectives withrole-Related duties: & Listening relevant intentionand clarity.Readily, professionally and D1,D3,D5,D6,D9 Skills tactfullyprovides feedbackas warranted, evenwhen unflattering. C16 Influence & Consensus-builds among board members and Related duties: Impact Skills stakeholders including community groups, counciland its D2,D3,D4,D5,D6 committees, police management, police associations, D9 etc. References: Saint John PoliceCommission Mandate (draft) Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD) -Key Competencies for Director Effectiveness 6/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ Police Competency Profile C1 Community Knowledge C2 -Knowledge of Governance& Oversight C3 -Financial Acumen C4 -Group Decision- Making Skills C5 -Process Orientation C6 -Conceptual Thinking Skills C7 -Independent Thinking Skills C8 Open- mindedness C9 -Ambiguity Tolerance C10 -Effective Judgment C11 -Integrity C12 -Self-awareness C13 -Bias to Learn C14 -Orientation to Resolve Conflict C15 -Communication & Listening Skills C16 -Influence & Impact Skills 7/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ Police CommissionerCompetency ProfileScoring Matrix C1 CommunityKnowledge C2 -Knowledge of Governance& Oversight C3 -Financial Acumen C4 -Group Decision-Making Skills C5 -Process Orientation C6 -Conceptual Thinking Skills C7 -Independent Thinking Skills C8 Open-mindedness C9 -Ambiguity Tolerance C10 -Effective Judgment C11 -Integrity C12 -Self-awareness C13 -Bias to Learn C14 -Orientation to Resolve Conflict C15 -Communication & Listening Skills C16 -Influence & Impact Skills 8/8 ® \[Ļğ͵ Committee of the Whole Open Report M&C No.2026-241 Report DateOctober 13, 2026 Meeting Date October 19, 2026 Finance and Strategic Service Area Investments Her Worship Mayor Donna Reardon and Members of Common Council SUBJECT: License Agreement with NB Power to conduct tree clearing within Saint John Corridor Project (SJCP) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT FOR OPEN SESSION OF COUNCIL NB Power has approached the City of Saint John seeking consent to undertake clearing activities on the 22 PIDs associated with the Saint John Corridor Project. This request has been made prior to the easements being presented to Council for approval. Approval of the easements remains contingent upon acceptance of a condition that would allow Saint John Energy to wheel The City does not expect the easements to be finalized until sometime in 2027. However, NB September 1 to March 30, and they are therefore requesting access to the City-owned PIDs,via a License Agreement, to carry out this work within that timeframe. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1.